Experiences of help-seeking from professional services for a child or young person's mental health concerns during the pandemic: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: The immediate response to the Covid-19 pandemic saw school closures and a shift in provision to online health services for children and young people experiencing mental health concerns. This study provides mental health and referral services with an insight into difficulties experienced as well as recommendations on potential improvements. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 11 parents and six young people. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Parents and young people reported mixed experiences on accessing mental health support. Priorities and pressures on health services impacted the likelihood of choosing to seek and being able to obtain help. Parents and young people had varying expectations and experiences in help-seeking during the pandemic which were also impacted by others' experiences and views. For many, the relationship with the professional they were in contact with impacted their mental health treatment. Provision was sometimes accessed via private services due to long waiting lists or problems that did not "meet threshold". CONCLUSION: Understanding the experiences of seeking mental healthcare during the pandemic can inform improvements to access to services at a time when people are most vulnerable. Accessible provision other than private services needs to be made for those on waiting lists. For those who do not meet service threshold, intermediary support needs to be secured to prevent unnecessary exacerbation of symptoms and prolonged problems. If schools are to remain the hub for children and young people's mental health services, they should be considered essential services at all times.

Evaluating team-based learning in a foundation training pathway for trainee pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: A new programme incorporating online study days delivered using team-based learning (TBL) for hospital-based trainee pharmacists (TPs) in the North of England was created. To our knowledge, TBL has not previously been used in educational programmes for TPs designed to supplement their workplace learning. The project aimed to investigate the experiences of TPs learning using online TBL by exploring their perceptions on their engagement, learning, and satisfaction with TBL. METHOD: Data were collected using online anonymous surveys at the end of four online TBL study days. A bespoke survey consisted of 5-point or 4-point Likert scale and two free text questions. TBL Student Assessment Instrument (SAI), a validated survey, was used to assess TPs' acceptance of TBL. Survey data was summarized descriptively, and free text comments analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: TPs developed accountability to their team, remained engaged with TBL delivery online and stated a preference for and satisfaction with this method. TPs valued opportunities to apply their knowledge in challenging scenarios and learn from discussions with their peers, the larger group, and facilitators. TBL was also perceived to be an engaging approach to learning and helped to maintain their interest with the teaching material. However, TPs struggled to engage with pre-work outside of the class due to competing work priorities. DISCUSSION: This study shows that online TBL was well accepted by TPs and can be successfully used to deliver education to large cohorts of learners. The model developed shows potential for scalability to larger numbers of learners.

Infection prevention and control in computed tomography: creating a national survey.

BACKGROUND: Infection prevention and control (IPC) is essential for quality healthcare, with healthcare associated infections (HAI) a known risk to patients requiring medical imaging (MI). To date, few papers have adopted a national approach to understanding or benchmarking the knowledge of, attitudes toward, and practice (KAP) of IPC in the context of MI and no validated surveys or scales are identified in the literature. The Computed Tomography (CT) suite is a unique MI environment where radiographers deliver prescription medicines to patients via intravenous (IV) means through an injector system. This paper describes the development of a survey that informs the use of IPC processes in the CT suite. METHODS: Standard Precautions via current national guidelines formed the benchmark of the survey, with a KAP survey used as the framework to explore IPC. The questions and associated responses are developed based on the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) guidelines, industry/professional protocols and adapted to the equipment and practices commonly used in the CT suite of MI departments by radiographers and nurses. RESULTS: Key survey development steps are described to include the justification of the benchmarking source, the survey framework and design. Detailed information is given to show the evolution of truth statements and sources, KAP question variations, and rationales for the methodology of question responses. National guidelines are mapped to survey questions and responses and pilot testing reflections are included. CONCLUSION: This paper reports on the construction of a standardised KAP survey for IPC specific to the CT suite in the Australian healthcare setting. The survey is ready for dissemination amongst MI departments. Documented use will aid validation and reliability as a survey tool to measure and map IPC specifically in relation to IV contrast administration.

Knowledge, attitudes and practice of infection prevention and control in the CT suite.

BACKGROUND: Infection, prevention, and control (IPC) practices are essential to protect patients and staff within healthcare facilities. Radiology departments cater to both inpatients and outpatients, and breaches of IPC practice have led to outbreaks of disease within healthcare facilities. This study aims to examine the knowledge, attitudes and practice (KAP) of computed tomography (CT) radiographers and nurses in their infection, prevention, and control (IPC) practice. The KAP components focuses on the CT environment, contrast injector use, and workplace factors that impact IPC practice. METHODS: A cross-sectional KAP survey was distributed online to Australian CT radiographers and radiology nurses across different institutions. The survey covered demographics, each KAP component, and workplace culture. Spearman's correlation was used to compare KAP scores. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the KAP scores between demographic categories, and Chi Square was used to compare demographic data with workplace culture. RESULTS: There were 147 respondents, 127 of which were radiographers and 20 were nurses. There was a moderate positive correlation between knowledge and attitude for radiographers (rho = 0.394, p < 0.001). Radiographers also had a moderate positive relationship between attitudes and practice (rho = 0.466, p < 0.001). Both radiographers and nurses scored high in the knowledge section of the survey, but nurses had statistically significant higher practice scores than radiographers (p = 0.014). CT radiographers who had an IPC team in their workplace or worked in public hospitals, had statistically significant higher attitudes and practice scores. Age, education, and years of experience did not impact on KAP scores. CONCLUSION: The study found that radiographers and nurses had a good baseline knowledge of standard precautions. IPC teams and continued training is important to positively influence knowledge and attitudes of health professionals towards IPC practice. The KAP survey was a useful tool to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practice on IPC of CT radiographers and nurses and identified areas for education, interventions, and leadership.

Infection prevention and control in medical imaging surveys: The need to map to guidelines to address systemic issues?

BACKGROUND: Infection prevention and control (IPC) in the medical imaging (MI) setting is recognised as an important factor in providing high-quality patient care and safe working conditions. Surveys are commonly used and have advantages for IPC research. The aim of this study was to identify the core concepts in surveys published in the literature that examined IPC in MI environments. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to identify studies that employed a survey relating to IPC in the MI setting. For each included study, descriptive study information and survey information were extracted. For IPC-specific survey items, directed content analysis was undertaken, using eleven pre-determined codes based on the 'Australian Guidelines for the Prevention and Control of Infection in Healthcare'. Content that related to 'Knowledge', 'Attitudes' and 'Practice' were also identified. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies and 21 unique surveys were included in this review. IPC-specific survey items assessed diverse dimensions of IPC, most commonly relating to 'transmission-based precautions' and 'applying standard and transmission-based precautions during procedures'. 'Practice' and 'Knowledge' related survey items were most frequent, compared to 'Attitudes'. CONCLUSION: MI research using survey methods have focused on the 'entry' points of IPC, rather than systemic IPC matters around policy, education, and stewardship. The concepts of 'Knowledge', 'Attitudes' and 'Practice' are integrated in IPC surveys in the MI context, with a greater focus evident on staff knowledge and practice. Existing topics within IPC surveys in MI are tailored to individual studies and locales, with lack of consistency to national frameworks.

How does the increase in eating difficulties according to the Development and Well-Being Assessment screening items relate to the population prevalence of eating disorders? An analysis of the 2017 Mental Health in Children and Young People survey.

OBJECTIVE: We examine the test accuracy of the Development and Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA) eating disorder screening items to explore whether the increased eating difficulties detected in the English National Mental Health of Children and Young People (MHCYP) Surveys 2021 reflect an increased population prevalence. METHODS: Study 1 calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values from responses to the DAWBA screening items from 4057 11-19-year-olds and their parents, in the 2017 MHCYP survey. Study 2 applied the positive predictive value to data from 1844 11-19-year-olds responding to the 2021 follow-up to estimate the prevalence of eating disorders in England compared to 2017 prevalence. RESULTS: Parental report most accurately predicted an eating disorder (93.6%, 95% confidence interval: 92.7-94.5). Sensitivity increased when parent and child answers were combined, and with a higher threshold (of two) for children. The prevalence of eating disorders in 2021 was 1% in 17-19-year-olds, and .6% in 11-16-year-olds-similar to the prevalence reported in 2017 (.8% and .6%, respectively). However, estimates for boys (.2%-.4%) and young men (.0%-.4%) increased. DISCUSSION: We found tentative evidence of increased population prevalence of eating disorders, particularly among young men. Despite this, the DAWBA screening items are useful for ruling out eating disorders, particularly when parents or carers screen negative, but are relatively poor at predicting who will have a disorder. Data from both parents and children and applying a higher cut point improves accuracy but at the expense of more missed cases. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The prevalence of eating disorders did not markedly change from 2017 to 2021, but we found tentative evidence of an increase, particularly among young men. This is despite larger increases in problematic eating, which need further investigation. The DAWBA screen is best suited to ruling out eating disorders which limits its clinical applications as it would provide many false positives requiring further assessment.

Incidence, healthcare-seeking behaviours, antibiotic use and natural history of common infection syndromes in England: results from the Bug Watch community cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Better information on the typical course and management of acute common infections in the community could inform antibiotic stewardship campaigns. We aimed to investigate the incidence, management, and natural history of a range of infection syndromes (respiratory, gastrointestinal, mouth/dental, skin/soft tissue, urinary tract, and eye). METHODS: Bug Watch was an online prospective community cohort study of the general population in England (2018-2019) with weekly symptom reporting for 6 months. We combined symptom reports into infection syndromes, calculated incidence rates, described the proportion leading to healthcare-seeking behaviours and antibiotic use, and estimated duration and severity. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 873 individuals with 23,111 person-weeks follow-up. The mean age was 54 years and 528 (60%) were female. We identified 1422 infection syndromes, comprising 40,590 symptom reports. The incidence of respiratory tract infection syndromes was two per person year; for all other categories it was less than one. 194/1422 (14%) syndromes led to GP (or dentist) consultation and 136/1422 (10%) to antibiotic use. Symptoms usually resolved within a week and the third day was the most severe. CONCLUSIONS: Most people reported managing their symptoms without medical consultation. Interventions encouraging safe self-management across a range of acute infection syndromes could decrease pressure on primary healthcare services and support targets for reducing antibiotic prescribing.

Symptom reporting, healthcare-seeking behaviour and antibiotic use for common infections: protocol for Bug Watch, a prospective community cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Antimicrobial resistance is a significant worldwide problem largely driven by selective pressure exerted through antibiotic use. Preserving antibiotics requires identification of opportunities to safely reduce prescriptions, for example in the management of mild common infections in the community. However, more information is needed on how infections are usually managed and what proportion lead to consultation and antibiotic use. The aim of this study is to quantify consultation and prescribing patterns in the community for a range of common acute infection syndromes (respiratory, gastrointestinal, skin/soft tissue, mouth/dental, eye and urinary tract). This will inform development of interventions to improve antibiotic stewardship as part of a larger programme of work, Preserving Antibiotics through Safe Stewardship. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be an online prospective community cohort study in England. We will invite 19 510 adults who previously took part in a nationally representative survey (the Health Survey for England) and consented to be contacted about future studies. Adults will also be asked to register their children. Data collection will consist of a baseline registration survey followed by weekly surveys sent by email for 6 months. Weekly surveys will collect information on symptoms of common infections, healthcare-seeking behaviour and use of treatments including antibiotics. We will calculate the proportions of infection syndromes that lead to General Practitioner consultation and antibiotic prescription. We will investigate how healthcare-seeking and treatment behaviours vary by demographics, social deprivation, infection profiles and knowledge and attitudes towards antibiotics, and will apply behavioural theory to investigate barriers and enablers to these behaviours. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been given ethical approval by the University College London Research Ethics Committee (ID 11813/001). Each participant will provide informed consent upon registration. We will disseminate our work through publication in peer-reviewed academic journals. Anonymised data will be made available through the UK Data Service (https://www.ukdataservice.ac.uk/).

Comparison of Sales Income and Research and Development Costs for FDA-Approved Cancer Drugs Sold by Originator Drug Companies.

Importance: High costs and risks of research and development (R&D) have been used to justify the high prices of cancer drugs. However, what the return on R&D investment is, and by extension what a justifiable price might be, is unclear. Objective: To compare incomes from the sales of cancer drugs with the estimated R&D costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study used global pharmaceutical industry sales data to quantify the cumulative incomes generated from the sales of cancer drugs for companies that have held patents or marketing rights (originator companies). All cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from 1989 to 2017 were identified from the United States Food and Drug Administration's website and literature. Itemized product sales data were extracted from the originator companies' consolidated financial reports. For drugs with data missing in specific years, additional data was sought from other public sources, or where necessary, estimated values from known reported values. Drugs were excluded if there were missing data for half or more of the years since approval. Data analysis was conducted from May 2018 to October 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sales data were expressed in 2017 US dollars with adjustments for inflation. Cumulative incomes from the sales of these drugs were compared against the R&D costs estimated in the literature, which had been adjusted for the costs of capital and trial failure (risk adjusted). Results: Of the 156 US Food and Drug Administration-approved cancer drugs identified, 99 drugs (63.5%) had data for more than half of the years since approval and were included in the analysis. There was a median of 10 years (range, 1-28 years) of sales data with 1040 data points, 79 (7.6%) of which were estimated. Compared with the total risk-adjusted R&D cost of $794 million (range, $2827-$219 million) per medicine estimated in the literature, by the end of 2017, the median cumulative sales income was $14.50 (range, $3.30-$55.10) per dollar invested for R&D. Median time to fully recover the maximum possible risk-adjusted cost of R&D ($2827 million) was 5 years (range, 2-10 years; n = 56). Cancer drugs continued to generate billion-dollar returns for the originator companies after the end-of-market exclusivity, particularly for biologics. Conclusions and Relevance: Cancer drugs, through high prices, have generated returns for the originator companies far in excess of possible R&D costs. Lowering prices of cancer drugs and facilitating greater competition are essential for improving patient access, health system's financial sustainability, and future innovation.

Beliefs about Sexual Assault in India and Britain are Explained by Attitudes Toward Women and Hostile Sexism.

As many as one in five women worldwide will be sexually assaulted over the course of her lifetime (United Nations 2008), yet myths that downplay the prevalence and severity of sexual assault are still widely accepted. Are myths about sexual assault (rape myths) more likely to be accepted in cultures that endorse more traditional gender roles and attitudes toward women? To explore the relationships among rape myth acceptance, attitudes toward women, and hostile and benevolent sexism, data were collected from 112 Indian and 117 British adults, samples from two cultures differing widely in their gender role traditionalism. Analyses confirmed a cultural difference in rape myth acceptance, with the more traditional culture, India, accepting myths to a greater extent than the more egalitarian culture, Britain. Indian participants' greater rape myth acceptance was explained by their more traditional gender role attitudes and hostile sexism. We discuss ways in which promoting gender egalitarianism may help to break down negative beliefs and reduce the stigma surrounding sexual assault, especially in India, for example through interventions which increase exposure to women in less traditional roles (e.g., those in positions of power).

Cost-effectiveness thresholds: pros and cons.

Cost-effectiveness analysis is used to compare the costs and outcomes of alternative policy options. Each resulting cost-effectiveness ratio represents the magnitude of additional health gained per additional unit of resources spent. Cost-effectiveness thresholds allow cost-effectiveness ratios that represent good or very good value for money to be identified. In 2001, the World Health Organization's Commission on Macroeconomics in Health suggested cost-effectiveness thresholds based on multiples of a country's per-capita gross domestic product (GDP). In some contexts, in choosing which health interventions to fund and which not to fund, these thresholds have been used as decision rules. However, experience with the use of such GDP-based thresholds in decision-making processes at country level shows them to lack country specificity and this - in addition to uncertainty in the modelled cost-effectiveness ratios - can lead to the wrong decision on how to spend health-care resources. Cost-effectiveness information should be used alongside other considerations - e.g. budget impact and feasibility considerations - in a transparent decision-making process, rather than in isolation based on a single threshold value. Although cost-effectiveness ratios are undoubtedly informative in assessing value for money, countries should be encouraged to develop a context-specific process for decision-making that is supported by legislation, has stakeholder buy-in, for example the involvement of civil society organizations and patient groups, and is transparent, consistent and fair.

Les analyses de rentabilité permettent de comparer les coûts et les résultats de différentes options politiques. Chaque ratio coût-efficacité qui en découle indique l'importance des avantages supplémentaires pour la santé par unité supplémentaire de ressources dépensée. Les seuils de rentabilité permettent de déterminer les ratios coût-efficacité qui représentent une bonne ou une très bonne rentabilité. En 2001, la Commission macroéconomie et santé de l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé a suggéré des seuils de rentabilité définis d'après des multiples du produit intérieur brut (PIB) par habitant d'un pays. Dans certains pays, ces seuils ont servi de règles pour décider quelles interventions financer ou non. Cependant, l'expérience d'utilisation de ces seuils fondés sur le PIB dans les processus décisionnels des pays montre qu'ils ne tiennent pas compte des spécificités des pays; cela, ajouté à une certaine incertitude concernant la modélisation des ratios coût-efficacité, peut entraîner la prise de mauvaises décisions quant à l'utilisation des ressources sanitaires. Les informations sur la rentabilité des interventions devraient être prises en compte parallèlement à d'autres considérations, comme l'impact budgétaire et la faisabilité, dans le cadre d'un processus décisionnel transparent et non de façon isolée sur la base d'une seule valeur seuil. Bien que le caractère informatif des ratios coût-efficacité soit indéniable lorsqu'il s'agit d'évaluer la rentabilité des interventions, les pays devraient être encouragés à développer un processus de prise de décision spécifique au contexte, qui soit encadré par la législation et qui ait l'adhésion des parties intéressées, avec par exemple l'implication d'organisations de la société civile et de groupes de patients, et qui soit transparent, cohérent et équitable.

El análisis de rentabilidad se utiliza para comparar los costes y resultados de opciones políticas alternativas. Cada relación de rentabilidad resultante representa la magnitud de sanidad adicional obtenida por unidad adicional de recursos utilizados. Los umbrales de rentabilidad permiten la identificación de las relaciones de rentabilidad que representan un valor bueno o muy bueno del capital. En 2001, los umbrales de rentabilidad propuestos por la Comisión sobre Macroeconomía y Salud de la Organización Mundial de la Salud se basaron en múltiplos del producto interior bruto (PIB) per cápita de un país. En algunos contextos, se han utilizado estos umbrales para decidir qué intervenciones sanitarias financiar y cuáles no. No obstante, la experiencia con el uso de dichos umbrales basados en el PIB en los procesos de toma de decisiones a nivel nacional muestra la ausencia de especificidad según el país. Esto, además de la incertidumbre de las relaciones de rentabilidad modelo, puede dar lugar a una toma de decisiones equivocada sobre cómo emplear los recursos sanitarios. La información relativa a la rentabilidad debería utilizarse teniendo en cuenta otros factores (por ejemplo, el impacto presupuestario y aspectos de viabilidad) en un proceso transparente de toma de decisiones, en lugar de únicamente teniendo como referencia un solo valor del umbral. A pesar de que las relaciones de rentabilidad son indudablemente esclarecedoras a la hora de evaluar el valor del capital, es necesario fomentar que los países desarrollen un proceso específico del contexto apoyado por la legislación para tomar decisiones, como, por ejemplo, si las partes interesadas han aceptado la implicación de las organizaciones de la sociedad civil y grupos de pacientes y si es transparente, coherente y justa.