Review and update of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for People with Learning Disabilities (HoNOS-LD).

BACKGROUND: The Health of the Nation Outcomes Scales for people with Learning Disabilities (HoNOS-LD) is an 18-item measure which provides a structured and standardized approach to rating various clinical and psychosocial outcomes and has been in use nationally since 2002. AIMS: To revise and improve the HoNOS-LD's utility in contemporary intellectual disability (ID) services whilst retaining its original objectives and five-point severity ratings. METHOD: ID clinicians were invited to complete an online survey, rating each item on the existing measure for being fit for purpose, identifying issues and suggesting improvements based on their experience of using the HoNOS-LD in practice. Scales were then assessed and revised sequentially; survey responses were used to inform discussion and revisions to the HoNOS-LD by the Advisory Board. RESULTS: A total of 75 individuals replied. Respondents had used HoNOS-LD for an average of 8.0 years (S.D. 5.28 years) and 88% found the scale to be useful in their practice. On average, respondents used HoNOS-LD ratings to inform care 42.4% of the time (S.D. 33.5%). For each scale there was a significant negative correlation between the percentage of positive/very positive respondent ratings and the number of changes proposed. Common changes included simplifying terms, reducing ambiguity and replacing anachronistic language. CONCLUSION: The changes outlined in this paper are based on the advisory group's expert consensus. These changes are intended to improve reliability and validity but now need empirical testing as well as review by service users.

How financial incentives in parenting skills programs affect engagement and outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review will investigate the effects of financial incentives on engagement with and outcomes of evidence-based parenting skills programs to prevent and treat disruptive behavior disorders. INTRODUCTION: Evidence-based parenting skills programs are a first-line treatment in disruptive behavior disorders (ie, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder), but fewer than half of referred parents complete these programs. When untreated, children affected by disruptive behavior disorders are at elevated risk of incarceration, drug misuse, and educational under-performance. Financial incentives can improve parents' engagement with parenting skills programs, and are increasingly popular strategies in public health policy to increase rates of compliance with health interventions. However, no previous systematic review or meta-analysis of financial incentives in parenting skills programs has been conducted. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies (ie, studies with a control group allocated through a non-random process) testing the effects of financial incentives on engagement will be included. Study participants must be in a guardian role to a person under 18 years of age. There will be no restrictions on country setting. Only English-language publications will be included. METHODS: We will search PubMed, CINAHL, Sociological Abstracts, Cochrane Trials, and PsycINFO databases for relevant articles. Two independent reviewers will screen abstracts for eligibility. Data will be extracted from eligible articles by 2 researchers and results will be presented in tabular and narrative format, along with a meta-analysis using a random effects model and assessment of heterogeneity. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42022336210.

Take patients seriously when they say financial incentives help with adherence.

Small financial incentives have been proven effective at promoting healthy behaviours across medicine, including in psychiatry. There are a range of philosophical and practical objections to financial incentives. Drawing on the existing literature, specifically attempts to use financial incentives to promote antipsychotic adherence, we propose a 'patient-centred' view of evaluating financial incentive regimes. We argue that there is evidence that mental health patients like financial incentives, considering them fair and respectful. The enthusiasm of mental health patients for financial incentives lends support to their use, although it does not invalidate all objections against them.

Can incentives improve antipsychotic adherence in major mental illness? A mixed-methods systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Incentives have been effectively used in several healthcare contexts. This systematic review aimed to ascertain whether incentives can improve antipsychotic adherence, what ethical and practical issues arise and whether existing evidence resolves these issues. DESIGN: Systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Searches on 13 January 2021 (no start date) found papers on incentives for antipsychotics. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, qualitative research and ethical analyses were included. Papers measuring impact on adherence were synthesised, then a typology of ethical and policy issues was compiled, finally the empirical literature was compared with this typology to describe current evidence and identify remaining research questions. RESULTS: 26 papers were included. 2 RCTs used contingent financial incentives for long-acting injectable antipsychotic preparations. Over 12 months, there were significantly larger increases in adherence among the intervention groups versus control groups in both RCTs. There were no consistently positive secondary outcomes. 39 ethical and practical issues were identified. 12 of these are amenable to empirical study but have not been researched and for 7 the current evidence is mixed. CONCLUSIONS: In keeping with other areas of healthcare, antipsychotic adherence can be increased with financial incentives. Payments of 2.5 times minimum wage changed behaviour. The typology of issues reported in this systematic review provides a template for future policy and ethical analysis. The persistence of the effect and the impact of incentives on intrinsic motivation require further research. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020222702.

Randomised controlled trials of antidepressant and anti-anxiety medications for people with autism spectrum disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although widely used, the current evidence for the efficacy of antidepressant and anti-anxiety medications for people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is limited and conflicting. AIMS: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of these medications in people with ASD. METHOD: We searched the following databases: Cochrane Library, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, DARE and ClinicalTrials.gov. Additionally, we hand-searched 11 relevant journals. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Jadad score to assess the quality of each included study. We carried out a meta-analysis using a random effects model. RESULTS: We included 15 randomised controlled trials (13 on antidepressants and two on anti-anxiety medications) for a total of 958 people with ASD. Data showed contradictory findings among the studies, with larger studies mostly showing a non-significant difference in outcomes between the treatment and the placebo groups. Meta-analysis of pooled Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale and Clinical Global Impression Scale data from nine studies (60%) did not show any statistically significant inter-group difference on either of the outcome measures. The adverse effects reported were mild and, in most studies, their rates did not show any significant inter-group difference. CONCLUSIONS: Given the methodological flaws in the most included studies and contradictory findings, it is difficult to draw any definitive conclusion about the effectiveness of either antidepressant or anti-anxiety medications to treat either ASD core symptoms or associated behaviours. Robust, large-scale, randomised controlled trials are needed to address this issue.

Young people who self-harm: a prospective 1-year follow-up study.

PURPOSE: To explore repetition, service provision and service engagement following presentation of young people to emergency services with self-harm. METHODS: 969 patients who presented to accident and emergency services after self-harm were followed up prospectively for a period of 1 year. Data on rates, method, clinical history, initial service provision, engagement and repetition (defined as re-presenting to emergency services with further self-harm) were gathered from comprehensive electronic records. RESULTS: Young people were less likely to repeat self-harm compared to those aged 25 and above. A psychiatric history and a history of childhood trauma were significant predictors of repetition. Young people were more likely to receive self-help as their initial service provision, and less likely to receive acute psychiatric care or a hospital admission. There were no differences in engagement with services between young people and those aged 25 and above. CONCLUSION: Younger individuals may be less vulnerable to repetition, and are less likely to represent to services with repeated self-harm. All young people who present with self-harm should be screened for mental illness and asked about childhood trauma. Whilst young people are less likely to be referred to psychiatric services, they do attend when referred. This may indicate missed opportunity for intervention.