Evaluating the Psychometric Properties and Clinical Utility of a Digital Psychosocial Self-Screening Tool (HEARTSMAP-U) for Postsecondary Students: Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Existing screening tools for mental health issues among postsecondary students have several challenges, including a lack of standardization and codevelopment by students. HEARTSMAP-U was adapted to address these issues. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the suitability of HEARTSMAP-U as a self-screening tool for psychosocial issues among postsecondary students by evaluating its validity evidence and clinical utility. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted with University of British Columbia Vancouver students to evaluate HEARTSMAP-U's predictive validity and convergent validity. Participating students completed baseline and 3-month follow-up assessments via HEARTSMAP-U and a clinician-administered interview. RESULTS: In a diverse student sample (n=100), HEARTSMAP-U demonstrated high sensitivity (95%-100%) in identifying any psychiatric concerns that were flagged by a research clinician, with lower specificity (21%-25%). Strong convergent validity (r=0.54-0.68) was demonstrated when relevant domains and sections of HEARTSMAP-U were compared with those of other conceptually similar instruments. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary evaluation suggests that HEARTSMAP-U may be suitable for screening in the postsecondary educational setting. However, a larger-scale evaluation is necessary to confirm and expand on these findings.

HEARTSMAP-U: Adapting a Psychosocial Self-Screening and Resource Navigation Support Tool for Use by Post-secondary Students.

Background: Mental health challenges are highly prevalent in the post-secondary educational setting. Screening instruments have been shown to improve early detection and intervention. However, these tools often focus on specific diagnosable conditions, are not always designed with students in mind, and lack resource navigational support. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the adaptation of existing psychosocial assessment (HEARTSMAP) tools into a version that is fit-for-purpose for post-secondary students, called HEARTSMAP-U. Methods: We underwent a three-phase, multi-method tool adaptation process. First, a diverse study team proposed a preliminary version of HEARTSMAP-U and its conceptual framework. Second, we conducted a cross-sectional expert review study with Canadian mental health professionals (N = 28), to evaluate the clinical validity of tool content. Third, we conducted an iterative series of six focus groups with diverse post-secondary students (N = 54), to refine tool content and language, and ensure comprehensibility and relevance to end-users. Results: The adaptation process resulted in the HEARTSMAP-U self-assessment and resource navigational support tool, which evaluates psychosocial challenges across 10 sections. In Phase two, clinician experts expressed that HEARTSMAP-U's content aligned with their own professional experiences working with students. In Phase three, students identified multiple opportunities to improve the tool's end-user relevance by calling for more "common language," such as including examples, definitions, and avoiding technical jargon. Conclusions: The HEARTSMAP-U tool is well-positioned for further studies of its quantitative psychometric properties and clinical utility in the post-secondary educational setting.

The Impact of Universal Mental Health Screening on Pediatric Emergency Department Flow.

OBJECTIVE AND HYPOTHESIS: Assess the impact of universal mental health screening with MyHEARTSMAP on emergency department (ED) flow, an important aspect of feasibility. We hypothesized that the difference in departmental level ED length of stay (LOS) for screening and matched nonscreening days is less than 30 minutes. METHODS: We conducted a 2-center, retrospective cohort study between December 2017 and June 2019. At each center, random mental health screening days were assigned over the course of 15 consecutive months. We matched each 24-hour screening day to a unique nonscreening day based on: location (Center 1 or Center 2); day type (weekday: Monday-Thursday or weekend: Friday-Sunday); date (±28 days); and 24-hour volume (±15 patients). We collected retrospective patient flow data, including LOS, across all ED visits to determine the difference in departmental level median LOS between matched screening and nonscreening days. RESULTS: There was not a statistically significant difference in departmental LOS between screening and nonscreening days. Overall, the difference in departmental LOS was -4.0 minutes (95% confidence interval, -9.8, 1.8) for screening days compared to nonscreening days, with a difference of -2.0 minutes (-9.0, 4.9) at Center 1 and -6.0 minutes (-15.4, 3.4) at Center 2. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that universal mental health screening with MyHEARTSMAP can be implemented without a significant impact of ED LOS.

A randomized trial of auto-titrating CPAP and fixed CPAP in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea.

BACKGROUND: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) remains the treatment of choice for obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea (OSAH). Auto-titrating CPAP (APAP) devices automatically adjust pressure and may improve treatment compliance compared to fixed CPAP (F-CPAP). METHODS: Randomized, prospective, single-blind, crossover trial to compare efficacy, side effects, compliance, patient satisfaction and preference between APAP and F-CPAP therapy in patients with moderate to severe OSAH. There were two treatment periods of 4 weeks each (APAP and F-CPAP), separated by a 2-week washout period. RESULTS: Ten CPAP-naive OSAH patients (9 males) completed the study. They had Mean +/- SD age of 44.9 +/- 9.7 years; body mass index of 35.9 +/- 12.9 kg/m2 and apnea/hypopnea index (AHI) of 47.2 +/- 35.6. Both forms of therapy were equally effective in improving the symptoms and in reducing the AHI. Both forms of therapy were associated with frequent side effects and had similar patient compliance. At the end of the study, more patients (6-1) preferred F-CPAP to A-CPAP therapy. CONCLUSION: A-PAP was as effective as F-CPAP in the treatment of OSAH but was not associated with fewer side effects, better compliance, better satisfaction or increased patient preference.