Implementation strategies for telemental health: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a rapid shift from traditional face-to-face care provision towards delivering mental health care remotely through telecommunications, often referred to as telemental health care. However, the manner and extent of telemental health implementation have varied considerably across settings and areas, and substantial barriers are encountered. There is, therefore, a need to identify what works best for service users and staff and establish the key mechanisms for efficient integration into routine care. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify investigations of pre-planned strategies reported in the literature intended to achieve or improve effective and sustained implementation of telemental health approaches (including video calls, telephone calls, text messaging platforms or a combination of any of these approaches with face-to-face care), and to evaluate how different strategies influence implementation outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, with five databases searched for any relevant literature published between January 2010 and July 2021. Studies were eligible if they took place in specialist mental health services and focused on pre-planned strategies to achieve or improve the delivery of mental health care through remote communication between mental health professionals or between mental health professionals and service users, family members, unpaid carers, or peer supporters. All included studies were quality-assessed. Data were synthesised using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation of implementation strategies and the taxonomy of implementation outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria from a total of 14,294 records of which 338 were assessed at full text. All ERIC implementation strategies were used by at least one study, the most commonly reported being 'Train and educate stakeholders'. All studies reported using a combination of several implementation strategies, with the mean number of strategies used per study of 3.5 (range 2-6), many of which were reported to result in an improvement in implementation over time. Few studies specifically investigated a single implementation strategy and its associated outcomes, making conclusions regarding the most beneficial strategy difficult to draw. CONCLUSIONS: Using a combination of implementation strategies appears to be a helpful method of supporting the implementation of telemental health. Further research is needed to test the impact of specific implementation strategies on implementation outcomes.

Variations in the uptake of telemental health technologies in community and crisis mental health services during the early pandemic: a survey of mental health professionals in the UK.

BACKGROUND: One of the many challenges faced by mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic was how to deliver care during lockdown. In community and crisis services, this often meant rapidly adopting or expanding the use of telemental health technologies, including phone and video calls. The aim of this study is to explore variations in use and report staff views of such technologies during the early stages of the pandemic. The primary analysis compared rates of use between professions, demographic groups, genders, regions, and crisis and community services. METHODS: We used data from an online survey conducted by the Mental Health Policy Research Unit in Spring 2020 regarding the impact of the pandemic on mental healthcare in the United Kingdom. We included quantitative data from all professional groups working in community or crisis services providing care to working age adults, including general and specialist services. Our outcome of interest was the percentage of clients whom clinicians primarily interacted with via videocall. We also collected demographics and professional characteristics such as the type of mental health service respondents worked in. In addition, we explored respondents' views and experiences of telemental health as a medium for providing care. RESULTS: 978 participants were included in the primary analysis (834 provided outcome data for community services, 193 for crisis services). In community services, virtually all staff reported stopping some or all face-to-face appointments following the onset of the pandemic, with a large majority using video or phone call appointments where possible instead. Telemental health use was higher in community than in crisis services, and amongst professionals who mainly provided psychotherapy or peer support than in other groups. There was also evidence of use being lower in regions in Northern England, Scotland, and Wales than elsewhere. There was no evidence of an association with staff gender, age, or ethnicity. Staff were generally positive about telemental health and intended to make more use of technologies following the pandemic. However, significant barriers to its use were also reported, often involving skills and available infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its rapid implementation, telemental health was viewed positively by clinicians who saw it as an effective alternative to face-to-face appointments in some contexts, including during the pandemic. However, adoption of the technology also has the potential to exacerbate existing or create new inequalities without effective management of training and infrastructure needs.

Synthesis of the Evidence on What Works for Whom in Telemental Health: Rapid Realist Review.

BACKGROUND: Telemental health (delivering mental health care via video calls, telephone calls, or SMS text messages) is becoming increasingly widespread. Telemental health appears to be useful and effective in providing care to some service users in some settings, especially during an emergency restricting face-to-face contact, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, important limitations have been reported, and telemental health implementation risks the reinforcement of pre-existing inequalities in service provision. If it is to be widely incorporated into routine care, a clear understanding is needed of when and for whom it is an acceptable and effective approach and when face-to-face care is needed. OBJECTIVE: This rapid realist review aims to develop a theory about which telemental health approaches work (or do not work), for whom, in which contexts, and through what mechanisms. METHODS: Rapid realist reviewing involves synthesizing relevant evidence and stakeholder expertise to allow timely development of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in areas where evidence is urgently needed to inform policy and practice. The CMO configurations encapsulate theories about what works for whom and by what mechanisms. Sources included eligible papers from 2 previous systematic reviews conducted by our team on telemental health; an updated search using the strategy from these reviews; a call for relevant evidence, including "gray literature," to the public and key experts; and website searches of relevant voluntary and statutory organizations. CMO configurations formulated from these sources were iteratively refined, including through discussions with an expert reference group, including researchers with relevant lived experience and frontline clinicians, and consultation with experts focused on three priority groups: children and young people, users of inpatient and crisis care services, and digitally excluded groups. RESULTS: A total of 108 scientific and gray literature sources were included. From our initial CMO configurations, we derived 30 overarching CMO configurations within four domains: connecting effectively; flexibility and personalization; safety, privacy, and confidentiality; and therapeutic quality and relationship. Reports and stakeholder input emphasized the importance of personal choice, privacy and safety, and therapeutic relationships in telemental health care. The review also identified particular service users likely to be disadvantaged by telemental health implementation and a need to ensure that face-to-face care of equivalent timeliness remains available. Mechanisms underlying the successful and unsuccessful application of telemental health are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Service user choice, privacy and safety, the ability to connect effectively, and fostering strong therapeutic relationships need to be prioritized in delivering telemental health care. Guidelines and strategies coproduced with service users and frontline staff are needed to optimize telemental health implementation in real-world settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); CRD42021260910; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021260910.

Acute psychiatric care: approaches to increasing the range of services and improving access and quality of care.

Acute services for mental health crises are very important to service users and their supporters, and consume a substantial share of mental health resources in many countries. However, acute care is often unpopular and sometimes coercive, and the evidence on which models are best for patient experience and outcomes remains surprisingly limited, in part reflecting challenges in conducting studies with people in crisis. Evidence on best ap-proaches to initial assessment and immediate management is particularly lacking, but some innovative models involving extended assessment, brief interventions, and diversifying settings and strategies for providing support are potentially helpful. Acute wards continue to be central in the intensive treatment phase following a crisis, but new approaches need to be developed, evaluated and implemented to reducing coercion, addressing trauma, diversifying treatments and the inpatient workforce, and making decision-making and care collaborative. Intensive home treatment services, acute day units, and community crisis services have supporting evidence in diverting some service users from hospital admission: a greater understanding of how best to implement them in a wide range of contexts and what works best for which service users would be valuable. Approaches to crisis management in the voluntary sector are more flexible and informal: such services have potential to complement and provide valuable learning for statutory sector services, especially for groups who tend to be underserved or disengaged. Such approaches often involve staff with personal experience of mental health crises, who have important potential roles in improving quality of acute care across sectors. Large gaps exist in many low- and middle-income countries, fuelled by poor access to quality mental health care. Responses need to build on a foundation of existing community responses and contextually relevant evidence. The necessity of moving outside formal systems in low-resource settings may lead to wider learning from locally embedded strategies.

Implementation, Adoption, and Perceptions of Telemental Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Early in 2020, mental health services had to rapidly shift from face-to-face models of care to delivering the majority of treatments remotely (by video or phone call or occasionally messaging) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This resulted in several challenges for staff and patients, but also in benefits such as convenience or increased access for people with impaired mobility or in rural areas. There is a need to understand the extent and impacts of telemental health implementation, and barriers and facilitators to its effective and acceptable use. This is relevant both to future emergency adoption of telemental health and to debates on its future use in routine mental health care. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the adoption and impacts of telemental health approaches during the COVID-19 pandemic, and facilitators and barriers to optimal implementation. METHODS: Four databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science) were searched for primary research relating to remote working, mental health care, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Preprint servers were also searched. Results of studies were synthesized using framework synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 77 papers met our inclusion criteria. In most studies, the majority of contacts could be transferred to a remote form during the pandemic, and good acceptability to service users and clinicians tended to be reported, at least where the alternative to remote contacts was interrupting care. However, a range of impediments to dealing optimal care by this means were also identified. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of telemental health allowed some continuing support to the majority of service users during the COVID-19 pandemic and has value in an emergency situation. However, not all service users can be reached by this means, and better evidence is now needed on long-term impacts on therapeutic relationships and quality of care, and on impacts on groups at risk of digital exclusion and how to mitigate these. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews CRD42021211025; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021211025.

Service user experiences and views regarding telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A co-produced framework analysis.

BACKGROUND: The prominence of telemental health, including providing care by video call and telephone, has greatly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are clear variations in uptake and acceptability, and concerns that digital exclusion may exacerbate previous inequalities in access to good quality care. Greater understanding is needed of how service users experience telemental health, and what determines whether they engage and find it acceptable. METHODS: We conducted a collaborative framework analysis of data from semi-structured interviews with a sample of people already experiencing mental health problems prior to the pandemic. Data relevant to participants' experiences and views regarding telemental health during the pandemic were identified and extracted. Data collection and analysis used a participatory, coproduction approach where researchers with relevant lived experience, contributed to all stages of data collection, analysis and interpretation of findings alongside clinical and academic researchers. FINDINGS: The experiences and preferences regarding telemental health care of the forty-four participants were dynamic and varied across time and settings, as well as between individuals. Participants' preferences were shaped by reasons for contacting services, their relationship with care providers, and both parties' access to technology and their individual preferences. While face-to-face care tended to be the preferred option, participants identified benefits of remote care including making care more accessible for some populations and improved efficiency for functional appointments such as prescription reviews. Participants highlighted important challenges related to safety and privacy in online settings, and gave examples of good remote care strategies they had experienced, including services scheduling regular phone calls and developing guidelines about how to access remote care tools. DISCUSSION: Participants in our study have highlighted advantages of telemental health care, as well as significant limitations that risk hindering mental health support and exacerbate inequalities in access to services. Some of these limitations are seen as potentially removable, for example through staff training or better digital access for staff or service users. Others indicate a need to maintain traditional face-to-face contact at least for some appointments. There is a clear need for care to be flexible and individualised to service user circumstances and preferences. Further research is needed on ways of minimising digital exclusion and of supporting staff in making effective and collaborative use of relevant technologies.

Early impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health care and on people with mental health conditions: framework synthesis of international experiences and responses.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has many potential impacts on people with mental health conditions and on mental health care, including direct consequences of infection, effects of infection control measures and subsequent societal changes. We aimed to map early impacts of the pandemic on people with pre-existing mental health conditions and services they use, and to identify individual and service-level strategies adopted to manage these. METHODS: We searched for relevant material in the public domain published before 30 April 2020, including papers in scientific and professional journals, published first person accounts, media articles, and publications by governments, charities and professional associations. Search languages were English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, and Mandarin Chinese. Relevant content was retrieved and summarised via a rapid qualitative framework synthesis approach. RESULTS: We found 872 eligible sources from 28 countries. Most documented observations and experiences rather than reporting research data. We found many reports of deteriorations in symptoms, and of impacts of loneliness and social isolation and of lack of access to services and resources, but sometimes also of resilience, effective self-management and peer support. Immediate service challenges related to controlling infection, especially in inpatient and residential settings, and establishing remote working, especially in the community. We summarise reports of swiftly implemented adaptations and innovations, but also of pressing ethical challenges and concerns for the future. CONCLUSION: Our analysis captures the range of stakeholder perspectives and experiences publicly reported in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in several countries. We identify potential foci for service planning and research.

Early outcomes of gastrostomy feeding in paediatric allogenic bone marrow transplantation: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Nutrition support is an essential component of care for a child undergoing bone marrow transplantation (BMT). Enteral nutrition (EN) is becoming increasingly recognised as having advantages over parenteral nutrition (PN) and recommended as first-line nutrition support. EN has traditionally been provided via nasogastric tube (NGT). Gastrostomies avoid certain complications associated with NGTs and could provide a preferential alternative. AIMS: To compare nutritional and post-transplantation outcomes during admission, the primary outcome being PN use, between children who had a gastrostomy placed prophylactically prior to BMT versus those who had not. METHODS: Electronic medical records of children transplanted between January 2014 and May 2018 within a single-centre were retrospectively reviewed. Outcomes between the gastrostomy group (n = 54) and non-gastrostomy group (n = 91) were compared. RESULTS: Multivariate regression analyses showed children in the gastrostomy group were less likely to require PN (odds ratio (OR) 0.4; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2-0.9; P = 0.049), initiated PN later if required (hazard ratio 0.6; 95% CI 0.4-0.8; P = 0.005), more often received EN as first-line nutrition support (P < 0.001) and more frequently required EN post-discharge (OR 2.4; 95% CI 1.1-5.4; P = 0.029). No differences were found between groups on length of admission, day 100 overall survival, incidence of graft-versus-host-disease, positive blood cultures and changes in weight or albumin during admission. CONCLUSIONS: Providing EN via gastrostomy is feasible in this population and may be more acceptable to older children than NGTs. Weighing up the potential benefits against the potential risks of prophylactic gastrostomy placement in these high-risk children is a challenging decision. Further research investigating safety, longer-term outcomes and family perceptions of gastrostomy feeding is required.

Nutritional and Post-Transplantation Outcomes of Enteral versus Parenteral Nutrition in Pediatric Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review of Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) involves the administration of chemotherapy followed by the infusion of donor stem cells. After treatment, children can consequently experience nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, anorexia, and mucositis, which negatively impact oral intake, leading to rapid deterioration in nutritional status and risk of malnutrition. Nutrition support therefore becomes necessary to circumvent these adverse effects. This has traditionally been provided via parenteral nutrition (PN), but pediatric evidence is increasingly advocating enteral nutrition (EN) as a preferential alternative. The objective of this review is to determine the efficacy of any forms of EN versus PN provided during admission to children aged ≤ 18 years undergoing HSCT. Primary outcomes considered efficacy in relation to various nutritional parameters, and secondary outcomes included a range of post-transplantation parameters. Data sources included English and non-English articles from the start date of MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL and Cochrane Controlled Trials register, up to July 2018. Key journals were also hand searched, reference lists scanned, clinical experts contacted, and gray literature searched using EThOS and Open Grey. Randomized and observational studies comparing any forms of EN versus PN in children aged ≤ 18 years undergoing HSCT investigating nutritional or post-transplantation outcomes were eligible. Data were extracted from included studies using a custom extraction form that had previously been piloted. Because included studies were observational, risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions. Because only a small number of heterogenous studies reporting a wide range of differently defined outcomes were included, meta-analyses were not performed and data were presented in narrative form. Conflicting results in favor of either method of nutrition support or no difference between methods were seen for duration of interventions, nutritional intakes, biochemical and anthropometric changes, mortality, infections, length of admission, and neutrophil engraftment. EN may provide favorable benefits over PN regarding acute graft-versus-host-disease (aGVHD) and platelet engraftment. A paucity of studies was found investigating the question posed by this review. Included studies were clinically heterogenous regarding populations, interventions, and outcomes, at moderate to serious risk of bias due to the absence of randomization, confounding parameters, statistical control, retrospective designs, and participant selection. Some studies were more than 15 years old. Despite the limited number and poor quality of identified studies, results support the growing body of pediatric evidence that EN is feasible during HSCT. Similar differences regarding many nutritional and post-transplantation outcomes were seen in both forms of nutrition support, but EN could provide benefits above PN including reduced incidence of aGVHD and faster platelet engraftment.

Midwives' and health visitors' collaborative relationships: A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies.

OBJECTIVES: Interprofessional collaboration between midwives and health visitors working in maternal and child health services is widely encouraged. This systematic review aimed to identify existing and potential areas for collaboration between midwives and health visitors; explore the methods through which collaboration is and can be achieved; assess the effectiveness of this relationship between these groups, and ascertain whether the identified examples of collaboration are in line with clinical guidelines and policy. DESIGN: A narrative synthesis of qualitative and quantitative studies. DATA SOURCES: Fourteen electronic databases, research mailing lists, recommendations from key authors and reference lists and citations of included papers. REVIEW METHODS: Papers were included if they explored one or a combination of: the areas of practice in which midwives and health visitors worked collaboratively; the methods that midwives and health visitors employed when communicating and collaborating with each other; the effectiveness of collaboration between midwives and health visitors; and whether collaborative practice between midwives and health visitors meet clinical guidelines. Papers were assessed for study quality. RESULTS: Eighteen papers (sixteen studies) met the inclusion criteria. The studies found that midwives and health visitors reported valuing interprofessional collaboration, however this was rare in practice. Findings show that collaboration could be useful across the service continuum, from antenatal care, transition of care/handover, to postnatal care. Evidence for the effectiveness of collaboration between these two groups was equivocal and based on self-reported data. In relation, multiple enablers and barriers to collaboration were identified. Communication was reportedly key to interprofessional collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: Interprofessional collaboration was valuable according to both midwives and health visitors, however, this was made challenging by several barriers such as poor communication, limited resources, and poor understanding of each other's role. Structural barriers such as physical distance also featured as a challenge to interprofessional collaboration. Although the findings are limited by variable methodological quality, these were consistent across time, geographical locations, and health settings, indicating transferability and reliability.

What are the important factors in health-related quality of life for people with aphasia? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with or predictive of poor health-related quality of life (HRQL) in people with aphasia poststroke. Better understanding of these factors can allow better targeting of rehabilitation programs. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases, covering medical (eg, Medline, Excerpta Medica Database, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Ovid, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database) and social sciences (eg, PsycINFO) were searched and key experts were approached. STUDY SELECTION: Studies including specific information on the HRQL of people with aphasia poststroke using validated HRQL measures or established ways of analyzing qualitative data were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies against the eligibility criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: This was undertaken independently by 2 reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Quantitative studies were assessed for quality with Counsell and Dennis' critical appraisal tool for systematic review of prognostic models in acute stroke; qualitative studies with the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool for qualitative research. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fourteen research reports met the eligibility criteria. Because of their high heterogeneity, the data synthesis was narrative. The evidence is not strong enough to determine the main predictors of HRQL in people with aphasia. Still, emotional distress/depression, severity of aphasia and communication disability, other medical problems, activity limitations, and aspects of social network and support were important factors. CONCLUSIONS: Emotional distress, aphasia severity, communication and activity limitations, other medical problems, and social factors affect HRQL. Stroke HRQL studies need to include people with aphasia and report separately on them, in order to determine the main predictors of their HRQL and to identify what interventions can best address them.

A survey of the scope of therapeutic practice by UK optometrists and their attitudes to an extended prescribing role.

PURPOSE: Recent changes in medicines legislation in the UK have broadened the opportunities for optometrists to use and supply therapeutic drugs. We set out to investigate the current therapeutic practice of UK optometrists and to elicit their views on an extended prescribing role. METHODS: Members of the College of Optometrists were invited via email to take part in an online survey. The survey questions covered four areas: mode of practice, proximity and relationship to other providers of eye care, scope of current therapeutic practice and future plans regarding prescriber training. RESULTS: Of the 1,288 responses received (response rate 24%), over 90% were from optometrists working in community practice. Common, non-sight-threatening conditions were managed frequently or occasionally by between 69 and 96% of respondents. Blepharitis and dry eye were the most common (managed routinely by >70%). In terms of therapeutic agents used, large numbers of optometrists reported that they commonly supplied or recommended over-the-counter (non-prescription) drugs, particularly lubricants and anti-allergic agents. However, fewer respondents supplied antibiotics (only 14% supplying chloramphenicol or fusidic acid frequently). Overall, relatively few respondents (14%) expressed no interest in undertaking further training for extended prescribing, although several barriers were identified, including cost and time taken for training, lack of remuneration and fear of litigation. CONCLUSION: Significant numbers of community optometrists are currently managing a range of common ocular conditions using a limited formulary. Enabling optometrists to train as independent prescribers will further develop this role, allowing greater use of their skills and providing patients with quicker access to medicines.