Patient and Health Care Professional Perspectives on Stigma in Integrated Behavioral Health: Barriers and Recommendations.

PURPOSE: Stigma related to mental health is well documented and a major barrier to using mental and physical health care. Integrated behavioral health (IBH) in primary care, in which behavioral/mental health care services are located within a primary care setting, may reduce the experience of stigma. The purpose of this study was to assess the opinions of patients and health care professionals about mental illness stigma as a barrier to engagement with IBH and to gain insight into strategies to reduce stigma, encourage discussion of mental health, and increase uptake of IBH care. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 16 patients referred to IBH in a prior year and 15 health care professionals (12 primary care physicians and 3 psychologists). Interviews were transcribed and inductively coded separately by 2 coders for common themes and subthemes under the topic headings of barriers, facilitators, and recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 10 converging themes from interviews with patients and the health care professionals, representing important complementary perspectives, with respect to barriers, facilitators, and recommendations. Barriers included professionals, families, and the public as sources of stigma, as well as self-stigma or avoidance, or internalizing negative stereotypes. Facilitators and recommendations included normalizing discussion of mental health and mental health care-seeking action, using patient-centered and empathetic communication strategies, sharing by health care professionals of their own experiences, and tailoring the discussion of mental health to patients' preferred understanding. CONCLUSIONS: Health care professionals can help reduce perceptions of stigma by having conversations with patients that normalize mental health discussion, use patient-centered communication, promote professional self-disclosure, and are tailored to patients' preferred understanding.

Views of parents of children with Down syndrome on Alzheimer's disease vaccination.

Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) experience increased risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Recent studies suggest that a vaccine against AD may be forthcoming. Parental buy-in is critical to the success of any intervention in this population, as adults with DS often rely on familial support. This study aims to characterize parents' perceptions of a hypothetical vaccine to prevent AD in individuals with DS. A mixed-methods, anonymous survey was distributed via social media. Participants were asked about their experiences with DS and reactions to proposed interventions. Open-ended responses were thematically analyzed using NVivo 12. Of 1,093 surveys initiated, 532 were completed. Of the parents sampled (N = 532), a small majority (54.3%), supported the proposed AD vaccine. All expressed the need for extensive pre-enrollment education and minimal risk. For many, limited research and long-term sequelae were concerns.

Expansion of hospital-based blood collections in the face of COVID-19 associated national blood shortage.

BACKGROUND: When the coronavirus pandemic caused widespread school and business closures in March 2020, blood drives were canceled and the supply of blood decreased suddenly in the United States (US). In response, hospital-based transfusion medicine physicians instituted policies to conserve blood and decrease blood product usage. These efforts were aided by the US Surgeon General recommendation to cancel all elective procedures. Nevertheless, the duration, severity, and impact of the pandemic on the national blood supply was uncertain. Hospitals with in-house donor programs had the opportunity not only to control demand, but also increase supply. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A hospital-based blood donor center was rapidly mobilized to increase the supply of in-house collected blood, in order to counteract a sudden but potentially long-term depletion of the national blood supply during a pandemic. RESULTS: Collections increased approximately five-fold above baseline for whole blood units, while apheresis platelet units were maintained at the historical average for the blood donor center. Cancellation of elective procedures showed a modest, but not yet statistically significant decrease in average blood product usage per day, nevertheless the in-house collection rate was sufficient to meet demand. CONCLUSION: A hospital-based blood donor center can quickly increase collection volumes and capacity in the face of a national emergency or pandemic. The desire to collect units should be balanced with safety concerns, need for sustainability, and blood product demand.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patient Fertility Care.

The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the healthcare system have been widespread, with many institutions in the United States pausing elective procedures to redirect resources to critical care. Fertility care and assisted reproductive procedures were classified as elective procedures and similarly paused. We conducted qualitative interviews with patients and/or their partners (n = 25 female patients; n = 3 male partners) receiving care at a fertility clinic in the Midwest to understand patient appraisal of COVID-19 risk on the resumption of care following a month-long closure of an infertility clinic, and patient agreement with the clinic closure. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed from a grounded theory approach. Study participants reported an increased sense of urgency due to the delay in fertility procedures. This urgency often superseded concerns of potential COVID-19 infection, motivating patients to continue fertility treatment during a pandemic. In hindsight, some participants did not agree with the clinic's closure and treatment cessation, feeling that these steps negatively interrupted time-sensitive reproductive goals. Patient responses highlight the need for additional resources to support decision-making during times of crisis. Triaging patients based on time-sensitivity of treatment instead of a total shutdown respects patient autonomy for continuing treatment amidst uncertain COVID-19-impact.