Absconding from Public Mental Health Inpatient Units - Who Does it, and why?

Patients who abscond from acute inpatient psychiatric wards put themselves and others at risks of variable nature and severity. There is a limited understanding of what motivates them to do so. The research in this area is limited and predominantly outdated. To better understand the characteristics, patterns and predictors of people who abscond from hospital, this study compared absconding and non-absconding patients in a tertiary public hospital. Demographic and clinical characteristics were audited for patients who absconded (n = 159) and who did not abscond (n = 100) throughout a 2-year period. Patients who absconded in the public settings were more likely to be male, have suffered from a psychotic illness, had an increased number of psychiatric comorbidities, had a history of aggression, and used greater numbers of substances. They also had experienced homelessness, were case managed, and were managed as involuntary patients. Predictors were similar, and included involuntary legal status, greater number of substances used, greater numbers of comorbid psychiatric illnesses, polysubstance use, an absence of self-harm history, shorter duration of admission and male sex. This study has implications for the identification of those who are at greater risk of absconding from an inpatient unit. Through enhanced understanding, greater measures can be taken to minimise absconding and its associated risks.

The psychiatric impact of COVID-19 on healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are a vulnerable population who have been exposed to high work-related stress during the COVID-19 pandemic because of the high risk of infection and excessive workloads. HCWs are at greater risk of mental illness, particularly sleep disturbances, post-trauma stress syndromes, depression and anxiety. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to highlight the psychiatric impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on frontline HCWs, the need for screening and early diagnosis by general practitioners (GPs), and the appropriate psychosocial strategies and treatments to address this. DISCUSSION: Opportunistic screening for mental health issues among HCWs is especially important during the current pandemic. Various tools and strategies can be used for efficient assessment and treatment of the common mental health issues HCWs are likely to face.

The psychological impact of COVID-19 and other viral epidemics on frontline healthcare workers and ways to address it: A rapid systematic review.

BACKGROUND: As the world is battling the COVID-19 pandemic, frontline health care workers (HCWs) are among the most vulnerable groups at risk of mental health problems. The many risks to the wellbeing of HCWs are not well understood. Of the literature, there is a paucity of information around how to best prevent psychological distress, and what steps are needed to mitigate harm to HCWs' wellbeing. METHODS: A systematic review using PRISMA methodology was used to investigate the psychological impact on HCWs facing epidemics or pandemics, using three electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE and CINAHL), dating back to 2002 until the 21st of August 2020. The search strategy included terms for HCWs (e.g., nurse and doctor), mental health (e.g., wellbeing and psychological), and viral outbreaks (e.g., epidemic and pandemic). Only studies with greater than 100 frontline HCWs (i.e. doctors or nurses in close proximity to infected patients) were included. RESULTS: A total of 55 studies were included, with 53 using quantitative methodology and 2 were qualitative. 50 of the quantitative studies used validated measurement tools while 5 used novel questionnaires. The studies were conducted across various countries and included people with SARS (13 studies), Ebola (1), MERS (3) and COVID-19 (38). Findings suggest that the psychological implications to HCWs are variable with several studies demonstrating an increased risk of acquiring trauma or stress-related disorders, depression and anxiety. Fear of the unknown or becoming infected were at the forefront of the mental challenges faced. Being a nurse and being female appeared to confer greater risk. The perceived stigma from family members and society heightened negative implications; predominantly stress and isolation. Coping strategies varied amongst the contrasting sociocultural settings and appeared to differ amongst doctors, nurses and other HCWs. Implemented changes, and suggestions for prevention in the future consistently highlighted the need for greater psychosocial support and clearer dissemination of disease-related information. CONCLUSION: This review can inform current and future research priorities in the maintenance of wellbeing amongst frontline HCWs. Change needs to start at the level of policy-makers to offer an enhanced variety of supports to HCWs who play a critical role during largescale disease outbreaks. Psychological implications are largely negative and require greater attention to be mitigated, potentially through the involvement of psychologists, raised awareness and better education. The current knowledge of therapeutic interventions suggests they could be beneficial but more long-term follow-up is needed.

Profiling Absconders from Public and Private Inpatient Psychiatric Units: a Comparative Analysis.

Research related to absconding and its associated risks is limited in relation to inpatients from private psychiatric units. This study aimed to compare patients who abscond from public and private psychiatric inpatient settings. Demographic data was collated on the subjects (n = 214) who all had a history of absconding. Public absconders (n = 159) were more likely to have a psychotic illness, increased number of psychiatric diagnoses, history of aggression, substance use and homelessness, when compared to private absconders. Predictors identified for private absconders (n = 55) were female gender and fewer drugs used. This study has implications for the different profiles of absconders between the public and private settings.

Reporting and ideal testosterone levels in men undergoing androgen deprivation for prostate cancer-time for a rethink?

BACKGROUND: This study aims to review current laboratory reporting strategies across Australia and New Zealand with a view to propose a more useful template for reporting serum testosterone in the context of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Registered pathology laboratories in Australia and New Zealand were enrolled into the current study. An electronic or a phone survey was utilized to collect data from each participating laboratory. Obtained information included assay utilized, units reported, reference intervals, lowest reported value, and lowest detectable value. To identify recommendations for testosterone testing, a systematic search was performed across Web of Science (including MEDLINE), EMBASE, and Cochrane libraries. RESULTS: Assessment of national pathology laboratories identified significant heterogeneity in the reporting methods. Reports typically used a "normal healthy male of 35 years of age" as a comparator but did not refer to optimal castrate levels, the lowest level that their assay was able to detect, nor did they include appended clinical guidelines relating to the prostate cancer patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Across Australia and New Zealand, various methods for testing and reporting serum testosterone exist, while international guidelines remain vague. The fashion in which serum testosterone levels are displayed should be re-evaluated to address the relevant clinical population and reflect an agreed-upon castrate threshold in patients undergoing androgen deprivation therapy.

Penile Cancer: Contemporary Lymph Node Management.

PURPOSE: In penile cancer, the optimal diagnostics and management of metastatic lymph nodes are not clear. Advances in minimally invasive staging, including dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy, have widened the diagnostic repertoire of the urologist. We aimed to provide an objective update of the recent trends in the management of penile squamous cell carcinoma, and inguinal and pelvic lymph node metastases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically reviewed several medical databases, including the Web of Science® (with MEDLINE®), Embase® and Cochrane databases, according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The search terms used were penile cancer, lymph node, sentinel node, minimally invasive, surgery and outcomes, alone and in combination. Articles pertaining to the management of lymph nodes in penile cancer were reviewed, including original research, reviews and clinical guidelines published between 1980 and 2016. RESULTS: Accurate and minimally invasive lymph node staging is of the utmost importance in the surgical management of penile squamous cell carcinoma. In patients with clinically node negative disease, a growing body of evidence supports the use of sentinel lymph node biopsies. Dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy exposes the patient to minimal risk, and results in superior sensitivity and specificity profiles compared to alternate nodal staging techniques. In the presence of locoregional disease, improvements in inguinal or pelvic lymphadenectomy have reduced morbidity and improved oncologic outcomes. A multimodal approach of chemotherapy and surgery has demonstrated a survival benefit for patients with advanced disease. CONCLUSIONS: Recent developments in lymph node management have occurred in penile cancer, such as minimally invasive lymph node diagnosis and intervention strategies. These advances have been met with a degree of controversy in the contemporary literature. Current data suggest that dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy provides excellent sensitivity and specificity for detecting lymph node metastases. More robust long-term data on multicenter patient cohorts are required to determine the optimal management of lymph nodes in penile cancer.

Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen: A guide to the guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer remains the most common non-skin cancer malignancy in men. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is recognized as a biomarker for the diagnosis, monitoring, and risk prediction of prostate cancer. Its use in the setting of prostate cancer screening has been controversial due to the risk of over diagnosis and over treatment. OBJECTIVE: Within Australia, there are inconsistent recommendations surrounding the use of PSA screening in clinical practice. In light of the 2016 PSA-screening guidelines by the major Australian health authorities, the current review aims to highlight the controversies and objectively outline the current recommendations within Australia. DISCUSSION: Health-care authorities across Australia have issued conflicting guidelines for prostate cancer screening culminating in confusion amongst health care practitioners and members of the public alike. A general consensus is held by other countries across the globe but differences amongst the specific details in how to best employ a PSA screening program still exist.