Evaluating mental health decision units in acute care pathways (DECISION): a quasi-experimental, qualitative and health economic evaluation.

Background: People experiencing mental health crises in the community often present to emergency departments and are admitted to a psychiatric hospital. Because of the demands on emergency department and inpatient care, psychiatric decision units have emerged to provide a more suitable environment for assessment and signposting to appropriate care. Objectives: The study aimed to ascertain the structure and activities of psychiatric decision units in England and to provide an evidence base for their effectiveness, costs and benefits, and optimal configuration. Design: This was a mixed-methods study comprising survey, systematic review, interrupted time series, synthetic control study, cohort study, qualitative interview study and health economic evaluation, using a critical interpretive synthesis approach. Setting: The study took place in four mental health National Health Service trusts with psychiatric decision units, and six acute hospital National Health Service trusts where emergency departments referred to psychiatric decision units in each mental health trust. Participants: Participants in the cohort study (n = 2110) were first-time referrals to psychiatric decision units for two 5-month periods from 1 October 2018 and 1 October 2019, respectively. Participants in the qualitative study were first-time referrals to psychiatric decision units recruited within 1 month of discharge (n = 39), members of psychiatric decision unit clinical teams (n = 15) and clinicians referring to psychiatric decision units (n = 19). Outcomes: Primary mental health outcome in the interrupted time series and cohort study was informal psychiatric hospital admission, and in the synthetic control any psychiatric hospital admission; primary emergency department outcome in the interrupted time series and synthetic control was mental health attendance at emergency department. Data for the interrupted time series and cohort study were extracted from electronic patient record in mental health and acute trusts; data for the synthetic control study were obtained through NHS Digital from Hospital Episode Statistics admitted patient care for psychiatric admissions and Hospital Episode Statistics Accident and Emergency for emergency department attendances. The health economic evaluation used data from all studies. Relevant databases were searched for controlled or comparison group studies of hospital-based mental health assessments permitting overnight stays of a maximum of 1 week that measured adult acute psychiatric admissions and/or mental health presentations at emergency department. Selection, data extraction and quality rating of studies were double assessed. Narrative synthesis of included studies was undertaken and meta-analyses were performed where sufficient studies reported outcomes. Results: Psychiatric decision units have the potential to reduce informal psychiatric admissions, mental health presentations and wait times at emergency department. Cost savings are largely marginal and do not offset the cost of units. First-time referrals to psychiatric decision units use more inpatient and community care and less emergency department-based liaison psychiatry in the months following the first visit. Psychiatric decision units work best when configured to reduce either informal psychiatric admissions (longer length of stay, higher staff-to-patient ratio, use of psychosocial interventions), resulting in improved quality of crisis care or demand on the emergency department (higher capacity, shorter length of stay). To function well, psychiatric decision units should be integrated into the crisis care pathway alongside a range of community-based support. Limitations: The availability and quality of data imposed limitations on the reliability of some analyses. Future work: Psychiatric decision units should not be commissioned with an expectation of short-term financial return on investment but, if appropriately configured, they can provide better quality of care for people in crisis who would not benefit from acute admission or reduce pressure on emergency department. Study registration: The systematic review was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews as CRD42019151043. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/49/70) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

People who experience mental health crises often go to a hospital emergency department and can be admitted to a psychiatric hospital. Emergency departments and psychiatric wards are not always the best environments for supporting people in a crisis. Emergency departments are overcrowded and waits can be very long; psychiatric wards are also very busy. Psychiatric decision units have been introduced to reduce pressure and improve experiences of crisis care. Psychiatric decision units are short-stay hospital-based units where people can be assessed and signposted to the most appropriate care. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of psychiatric decision units on emergency department visits, psychiatric admissions and the cost of mental health care, and to consider the best way for psychiatric decision units to be structured. We looked at research on similar units internationally and identified all psychiatric decision units in England. We evaluated the impact of psychiatric decision units four mental health NHS trusts on emergency department visits and psychiatric admissions by examining electronic patient records in the 2 years before and after units opened, and by comparing records in areas with and without psychiatric decision units using data from NHS Digital. We compared mental health services used by people in the 9 months before and after their first psychiatric decision unit stay. We interviewed people about their experiences of the psychiatric decision unit and crisis care. We also interviewed staff working on and referring people to psychiatric decision units. There were some reductions in psychiatric admissions, emergency department visits and wait times following opening of psychiatric decision units. The resulting cost savings were small and did not outweigh the costs of running psychiatric decision units. People mostly found units safe, calming and supportive, except where they were discharged too quickly. Psychiatric decision units worked best to reduce psychiatric admissions and improve quality of crisis care where stays were longer and staffing levels higher. Psychiatric decision units had more impact on emergency departments where they were larger and stays were shorter.

Disparities in Female Oncofertility Care in the United States: More Questions Than Answers.

As cancer therapies continue to improve, the survival rates of adolescent and young adult patients have increased. Consequently, considering patient quality of life after cancer, including family building, has become an essential aspect of establishing a treatment plan. However, the gonadotoxic nature of many chemotherapeutic agents limits the option of using one's own gamete for family building. In recent years, significant advancements have been made in oncofertility, particularly vitrification of oocytes. Unfortunately, as with many areas of medicine, health disparities limit those that can access and utilize fertility preservation prior to cancer treatment. This review aims to shed light on existing disparities in oncofertility for female patients, to offer recommendations to enhance education, access, and advocacy, as well as identify potential areas for future research.

MODIFI: protocol for randomised feasibility study of eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (EMDR) for functional neurological disorder (FND).

INTRODUCTION: Functional neurological disorder (FND) refers to an involuntary loss of control over and/or aberrant perception of the body. Common presenting symptoms are functional (non-epileptic) seizures, and functional motor disorder, for example, walking difficulties, weakness or tremor. Greater access to effective treatments would lead to reduced distress and disability; and reduce unnecessary healthcare costs.This study will examine eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (EMDR) as a treatment for FND. EMDR is an evidence-based treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but its use for other conditions is growing. An FND-specific EMDR protocol will be tested, and if the intervention proves feasible with promising clinical outcomes, progression to a substantive study could take place. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Fifty adult patients diagnosed with FND will be recruited. It will be a single-blind randomised controlled trial with two arms: EMDR (plus standard neuropsychiatric care; NPC) and standard NPC. The two groups will be compared at baseline (T0), 3 months (T1), 6 months (T2) and 9 months (T3). Measures of feasibility include safety, recruitment, retention, treatment adherence and acceptability. Clinical outcome measures will assess health-related functioning/quality of life, ratings of FND symptoms and severity, depression, anxiety, PTSD, dissociation, service utilisation and other costs. Improvement and satisfaction ratings will also be assessed. Feasibility outcomes will be summarised using descriptive statistics. Exploratory analyses using (linear/logistic) mixed-effect models will examine the rate of change in the groups' clinical outcome measures across the four time-points.After the intervention period, a sample of participants, and clinicians, will be invited to attend semistructured interviews. The interviews will be analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the NHS West Midlands-Edgbaston Research Ethics Committee. Study findings will be published in open access peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences, and communicated to participants and other relevant stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05455450 (www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov).

Feasibility randomised controlled trial of online group Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Functional Cognitive Disorder (ACT4FCD).

INTRODUCTION: Functional cognitive disorder (FCD) is seen increasingly in clinics commissioned to assess cognitive disorders. Patients report frequent cognitive, especially memory, failures. The diagnosis can be made clinically, and unnecessary investigations avoided. While there is some evidence that psychological treatments can be helpful, they are not routinely available. Therefore, we have developed a brief psychological intervention using the principles of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) that can be delivered in groups and online. We are conducting a feasibility study to assess whether the intervention can be delivered within a randomised controlled trial. We aim to study the feasibility of recruitment, willingness to be randomised to intervention or control condition, adherence to the intervention, completion of outcome measures and acceptability of treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We aim to recruit 48 participants randomised 50:50 to either the ACT intervention and treatment as usual (TAU), or TAU alone. ACT will be provided to participants in the treatment arm following completion of baseline outcome measures. Completion of these outcome measures will be repeated at 8, 16 and 26 weeks. The measures will assess several domains including psychological flexibility, subjective cognitive symptoms, mood and anxiety, health-related quality of life and functioning, healthcare utilisation, and satisfaction with care and participant-rated improvement. Fifteen participants will be selected for in-depth qualitative interviews about their experiences of living with FCD and of the ACT intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study received a favourable opinion from the South East Scotland Research Ethics Committee 02 on 30 September 2022 (REC reference: 22/SS/0059). HRA approval was received on 1 November 2022 (IRAS 313730). The results will be published in full in an open-access journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12939037.

Short-stay crisis units for mental health patients on crisis care pathways: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, an increasing proportion of emergency department visits are mental health related. Concurrently, psychiatric wards are often occupied above capacity. Healthcare providers have introduced short-stay, hospital-based crisis units offering a therapeutic space for stabilisation, assessment and appropriate referral. Research lags behind roll-out, and a review of the evidence is urgently needed to inform policy and further introduction of similar units. AIMS: This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of short-stay, hospital-based mental health crisis units. METHOD: We searched EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL and PsycINFO up to March 2021. All designs incorporating a control or comparison group were eligible for inclusion, and all effect estimates with a comparison group were extracted and combined meta-analytically where appropriate. We assessed study risk of bias with Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions and Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials. RESULTS: Data from twelve studies across six countries (Australia, Belgium, Canada, The Netherlands, UK and USA) and 67 505 participants were included. Data indicated that units delivered benefits on many outcomes. Units could reduce psychiatric holds (42% after intervention compared with 49.8% before intervention; difference = 7.8%; P < 0.0001) and increase out-patient follow-up care (χ2 = 37.42, d.f. = 1; P < 0.001). Meta-analysis indicated a significant reduction in length of emergency department stay (by 164.24 min; 95% CI -261.24 to -67.23 min; P < 0.001) and number of in-patient admissions (odds ratio 0.55, 95% CI 0.43-0.68; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Short-stay mental health crisis units are effective for reducing emergency department wait times and in-patient admissions. Further research should investigate the impact of units on patient experience, and clinical and social outcomes.

The psychiatric decision unit as an emerging model in mental health crisis care: a national survey in England.

Psychiatric decision units have been developed in many countries internationally to address the pressure on inpatient services and dissatisfactory, long waits people in mental health crisis can experience in emergency departments. Research into these units lags behind their development, as they are implemented by healthcare providers to address these problems. This is the first-ever national survey to identify their prevalence, structure, activities, and contextual setting within health services, in order to provide a robust basis for future research. The response rate was high (94%), and six PDUs in England were identified. The results indicated that PDUs open 24/7, accept only voluntary patients, provide recliner chairs for sleeping rather than beds, and limit stays to 12-72 hours. PDUs are predominantly staffed by senior, qualified mental health nurses and healthcare assistants, with psychiatry input. Staff:patient ratios are high (1:2.1 during the day shift). Differences in PDU structure and activities (including referral pathway, length of stay, and staff:patient ratios) were identified, suggesting the optimal configuration for PDUs has not yet been established. Further research into the efficacy of this innovation is needed; PDUs potentially have a role in an integrated crisis care pathway which provides a variety of care options to service users.

Understanding recovery in the context of lived experience of personality disorders: a collaborative, qualitative research study.

BACKGROUND: Concepts of recovery increasingly inform the development and delivery of mental health services internationally. In the UK recent policy advocates the application of recovery concepts to the treatment of personality disorders. However diagnosis and understanding of personality disorders remains contested, challenging any assumption that mainstream recovery thinking can be directly translated into personality disorders services. METHODS: In a qualitative interview-based study understandings of recovery were explored in extended, in-depth interviews with six people purposively sampled from a specialist personality disorders' service in the UK. An interpretive, collaborative approach to research was adopted in which university-, clinical- and service user (consumer) researchers were jointly involved in carrying out interviews and analysing interview data. RESULTS: Findings suggested that recovery cannot be conceptualised separately from an understanding of the lived experience of personality disorders. This experience was characterised by a complexity of ambiguous, interrelating and conflicting feelings, thoughts and actions as individuals tried to cope with tensions between internally and externally experienced worlds. Our analysis was suggestive of a process of recovering or, for some, discovering a sense of self that can safely coexist in both worlds. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that key facilitators of recovery - positive personal relationships and wider social interaction - are also where the core vulnerabilities of individuals with lived experience of personaility disorders can lie. There is a role for personality disorders services in providing a safe space in which to develop positive relationships. Through discursive practice within the research team understandings of recovery were co-produced that responded to the lived experience of personality disorders and were of applied relevance to practitioners.

Open access support groups for people experiencing personality disorders: do group members' experiences reflect the theoretical foundations of the SUN project?

OBJECTIVES: The SUN Project is an innovative, open access support group, based in the community, for people experiencing personality disorders, developed in response to UK Department of Health policy advocating improvements in personality disorders services. The aim of this article is to critically explore where and how the theoretically informed model underpinning the SUN Project is reflected in the view and experiences of people attending the project. DESIGN: This article reports an in-depth, qualitative interview-based study employing a critical realist approach. METHODS: As part of a larger study about self-care and mental health, in-depth qualitative interviews were held with 38 people new to the SUN Project, and again 9 months later. Data were extracted that were relevant to core components of the project model and were subjected to thematic analysis. The critical realist approach was used to move back and forth between empirical data and theory underpinning the SUN project, providing critical insight into the model. RESULTS: Participant accounts were broadly concordant with core components of the SUN Project's underlying model: Open access and self-referral; group therapeutic processes; community-based support; service users as staff. There were some tensions between interviewee accounts and theoretical aspects of the model, notably around the challenges that group processes presented for some individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The model underlying the SUN Project is useful in informing good practice in therapeutic, community-based peer support groups for people experiencing personality disorders. Careful consideration should be given to a limited multi-modal approach, providing focused one-to-one support for vulnerable individuals who find it hard to engage in group processes. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Facilitated peer support groups based in the community may act as a powerful therapeutic resource for people experiencing personality disorders. Promoting open access and self-referral to support groups may increase feelings of empowerment and engagement for people experiencing personality disorders. Some individuals experiencing personality disorders who could potentially benefit from therapeutic groups may need focused one-to-one support to do so.

The experiences of detained mental health service users: issues of dignity in care.

BACKGROUND: When mental health service users are detained under a Section of the Mental Health Act (MHA), they must remain in hospital for a specific time period. This is often against their will, as they are considered a danger to themselves and/or others. By virtue of being detained, service users are assumed to have lost control of an element of their behaviour and as a result their dignity could be compromised. Caring for detained service users has particular challenges for healthcare professionals. Respecting the dignity of others is a key element of the code of conduct for health professionals. Often from the service user perspective this is ignored. METHODS: This paper reports on the experiences of 19 adult service users who were, at the time of interview, detained under a Section of the MHA. These service users had experienced coercive interventions and they gave their account of how they considered their dignity to be protected (or not), and their sense of self respected (or not). RESULTS: The service users considered their dignity and respect compromised by 1) not being 'heard' by staff members, 2) a lack of involvement in decision-making regarding their care, 3) a lack of information about their treatment plans particularly medication, 4) lack of access to more talking therapies and therapeutic engagement, and 5) the physical setting/environment and lack of daily activities to alleviate their boredom. CONCLUSIONS: Dignity and respect are important values in recovery and practitioners need time to engage with service user narratives and to reflect on the ethics of their practice.

Informing the development of services supporting self-care for severe, long term mental health conditions: a mixed method study of community based mental health initiatives in England.

BACKGROUND: Supporting self-care is being explored across health care systems internationally as an approach to improving care for long term conditions in the context of ageing populations and economic constraint. UK health policy advocates a range of approaches to supporting self-care, including the application of generic self-management type programmes across conditions. Within mental health, the scope of self-care remains poorly conceptualised and the existing evidence base for supporting self-care is correspondingly disparate. This paper aims to inform the development of support for self-care in mental health by considering how generic self-care policy guidance is implemented in the context of services supporting people with severe, long term mental health problems. METHODS: A mixed method study was undertaken comprising standardised psychosocial measures, questionnaires about health service use and qualitative interviews with 120 new referrals to three contrasting community based initiatives supporting self-care for severe, long term mental health problems, repeated nine months later. A framework approach was taken to qualitative analysis, an exploratory statistical analysis sought to identify possible associations between a range of independent variables and self-care outcomes, and a narrative synthesis brought these analyses together. RESULTS: Participants reported improvement in self-care outcomes (e.g. greater empowerment; less use of Accident and Emergency services). These changes were not associated with level of engagement with self-care support. Level of engagement was associated with positive collaboration with support staff. Qualitative data described the value of different models of supporting self-care and considered challenges. Synthesis of analyses suggested that timing support for self-care, giving service users control over when and how they accessed support, quality of service user-staff relationships and decision making around medication are important issues in supporting self-care in mental health. CONCLUSIONS: Service delivery components - e.g. peer support groups, personal planning - advocated in generic self-care policy have value when implemented in a mental health context. Support for self-care in mental health should focus on core, mental health specific qualities; issues of control, enabling staff-service user relationships and shared decision making. The broad empirical basis of our research indicates the wider relevance of our findings across mental health settings.

Patient and public involvement in the coproduction of knowledge: reflection on the analysis of qualitative data in a mental health study.

Patient and public involvement in health research is increasingly well established internationally, but the impacts of involvement on the research process are hard to evaluate. We describe a process of qualitative data analysis in a mental health research project with a high level of mental health service user and carer involvement, and reflect critically on how we produced our findings. Team members not from research backgrounds sometimes challenged academic conventions, leading to complex findings that would otherwise have been missing. An essential component of how we coproduced knowledge involved retaining methodological flexibility so that nonconventional research voices in the team could situate and critique what was conventionally known. Deliberate and transparent reflection on how "who we are" informed the knowledge we produced was integral to our inquiry. We conclude that reflecting on knowledge (co)production is a useful tool for evaluating the impact of patient and public involvement on health research.

One size fits all: or horses for courses? Recovery-based care in specialist mental health services.

INTRODUCTION: The 'recovery approach' to the management of severe mental health problems has become a guiding vision of service provision amongst many practitioners, researchers, and policy makers as well as service users. METHOD: This qualitative pilot study explored the meaning of 'recovery' with users of three specialist mental health services (eating disorders, dual diagnosis, and forensic) in 18 semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: The relevance of themes identified in mainstream recovery literature was confirmed; however, the interpretation and relative weight of these themes appeared to be affected by factors that were specific to the diagnosis and treatment context. 'Clinical' recovery themes were also seen as important, as were aspects of care that reflect core human values, such as kindness.

'What difference does it make?' Finding evidence of the impact of mental health service user researchers on research into the experiences of detained psychiatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Interest in the involvement of members of the public in health services research is increasingly focussed on evaluation of the impact of involvement on the research process and the production of knowledge about health. Service user involvement in mental health research is well-established, yet empirical studies into the impact of involvement are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the potential to provide empirical evidence of the impact of service user researchers (SURs) on the research process. DESIGN: The study uses a range of secondary analyses of interview transcripts from a qualitative study of the experiences of psychiatric patients detained under the Mental Health Act (1983) to compare the way in which SURs and conventional university researchers (URs) conduct and analyse qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Analyses indicated some differences in the ways in which service user- and conventional URs conducted qualitative interviews. SURs were much more likely to code (analyse) interview transcripts in terms of interviewees' experiences and feelings, while conventional URs coded the same transcripts largely in terms of processes and procedures related to detention. The limitations of a secondary analysis based on small numbers of researchers are identified and discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates the potential to develop a methodologically robust approach to evaluate empirically the impact of SURs on research process and findings, and is indicative of the potential benefits of collaborative research for informing evidence-based practice in mental health services.

Demographic and referral patterns of people detained under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act (1983) in a south London Mental Health Trust from 2005 to 2008.

This study aimed to retrospectively examine demographic and referral data for all detainees under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act (1983) at a 'place of safety' in one London Mental Health Trust over a three-year period. Data were collected for 887 consecutive detentions and indicated a clear over-representation of black detainees compared with their representation in the local population. A high proportion of detentions (41.2%) did not result in hospital admission. Implications for practice and service user experience should be considered as long as Section 136 remains an entry point to mental health services for many black people. There are implications for interprofessional practice where Mental Health Trust resources are expended supporting Section 136 detentions in which no hospital treatment follows.