Placebo stimulates neuroplasticity in depression: implications for clinical practice and research.

Neither psychological nor neuroscientific investigations have been able to fully explain the paradox that placebo is designed to be inert in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), yet appears to be effective in evaluations of clinical interventions in all fields of medicine and alternative medicine. This article develops the Neuroplasticity Placebo Theory, which posits that neuroplasticity in fronto-limbic areas is the unifying factor in placebo response (seen in RCTs) and placebo effect (seen in clinical interventions) where it is not intended to be inert. Depression is the disorder that has the highest placebo response of any medical condition and has the greatest potential for understanding how placebos work: recent developments in understanding of the pathophysiology of depression suggest that fronto-limbic areas are sensitized in depression which is associated with a particularly strong placebo phenomenon. An innovative linkage is made between diverse areas of the psychology and the translational psychiatry literature to provide supportive evidence for the Neuroplasticity Placebo Theory. This is underpinned by neuro-radiological evidence of fronto-limbic change in the placebo arm of antidepressant trials. If placebo stimulates neuroplasticity in fronto-limbic areas in conditions other than depression - and results in a partially active treatment in other areas of medicine - there are far reaching consequences for the day-to-day use of placebo in clinical practice, the future design of RCTs in all clinical conditions, and existing unwarranted assertions about the efficacy of antidepressant medications. If fronto-limbic neuroplasticity is the common denominator in designating placebo as a partially active treatment, the terms placebo effect and placebo response should be replaced by the single term "placebo treatment."

Influences of socioeconomic deprivation on GPs' decisions to refer patients to cardiology: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Variation in GP referral practice may be a factor contributing to the lower uptake of cardiology specialist services for people living in socioeconomic deprivation. Cardiology referrals were chosen for this study due to higher rates of premature death and emergency admissions resulting from coronary heart disease for patients living in more deprived areas. AIM: To find out how socioeconomic deprivation influences GP referral practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative study of GPs working in affluent and deprived areas of one large city in the UK. METHOD: The authors used purposive and snowball sampling to recruit 17 GP participants to interviews and a focus group. Participants were asked to reflect on their own experience of making referrals. The authors used a framework approach to the analysis, with differences in themes for GPs working in least and most deprived areas being highlighted. RESULTS: The authors identified four main themes by which socioeconomic deprivation influenced GP referral practice: identifying problems; making decisions about referral; navigating the healthcare system; and external pressures. Using a published framework of consultation complexity, the authors then examined the data in relation to a fifth theme of complexity. Referrals from areas of high socioeconomic deprivation involved greater complexity in the majority of the domains of this framework. CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic deprivation influences GP referral decisions and navigation of the healthcare system in multiple ways. Referral practice for GPs working in deprived areas is more complex than for their peers working in more affluent areas.

How primary care can contribute to good mental health in adults.

The need for support for good mental health is enormous. General support for good mental health is needed for 100% of the population, and at all stages of life, from early childhood to end of life. Focused support is needed for the 17.6% of adults who have a mental disorder at any time, including those who also have a mental health problem amongst the 30% who report having a long-term condition of some kind. All sectors of society and all parts of the NHS need to play their part. Primary care cannot do this on its own. This paper describes how primary care practitioners can help stimulate such a grand alliance for health, by operating at four different levels - as individual practitioners, as organisations, as geographic clusters of organisations and as policy-makers.

Promoting Mental Health and Preventing Mental Illness in General Practice.

This paper calls for the routine integration of mental health promotion and prevention into UK General Practice in order to reduce the burden of mental and physical disorders and the ensuing pressure on General Practice. The proposals & the resulting document (https://ethicscharity.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/rcgp_keymsg_150925_v5.pdf) arise from an expert 'Think Tank' convened by the London Journal of Primary Care, Educational Trust for Health Improvement through Cognitive Strategies (ETHICS Foundation) and the Royal College of General Practitioners. It makes 12 recommendations for General Practice: (1) Mental health promotion and prevention are too important to wait. (2) Work with your community to map risk factors, resources and assets. (3) Good health care, medicine and best practice are biopsychosocial rather than purely physical. (4) Integrate mental health promotion and prevention into your daily work. (5) Boost resilience in your community through approaches such as community development. (6) Identify people at increased risk of mental disorder for support and screening. (7) Support early intervention for people of all ages with signs of illness. (8) Maintain your biopsychosocial skills. (9) Ensure good communication, interdisciplinary team working and inter-sectoral working with other staff, teams and agencies. (10) Lead by example, taking action to promote the resilience of the general practice workforce. (11) Ensure mental health is appropriately included in the strategic agenda for your 'cluster' of General Practices, at the Clinical Commissioning Groups, and the Health and Wellbeing Board. (12) Be aware of national mental health strategies and localise them, including action to destigmatise mental illness within the context of community development.

Patient Acceptability of the Yorkshire Dialysis Decision Aid (YoDDA) Booklet: A Prospective Non-Randomized Comparison Study Across 6 Predialysis Services.

UNLABELLED: ♦ BACKGROUND: Patients are satisfied with their kidney care but want more support in making dialysis choices. Predialysis leaflets vary across services, with few being sufficient to enable patients' informed decision making. We describe the acceptability of a patient decision aid and feasibility of evaluating its effectiveness within usual predialysis practice. ♦ METHODS: Prospective non-randomized comparison design, Usual Care or Usual Care Plus Yorkshire Dialysis Decision Aid Booklet (+YoDDA), in 6 referral centers (Yorkshire-Humber, UK) for patients with sustained deterioration of kidney function. Consenting (C) patients completed questionnaires after predialysis consultation (T1), and 6 weeks later (T2). Measures assessed YoDDA's utility to support patients' decisions and integration within usual care. ♦ RESULTS: Usual Care (n = 105) and +YoDDA (n = 84) participant characteristics were similar: male (62%), white (94%), age (mean = 62.6; standard deviation [SD] 14.4), kidney disease severity (glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] mean = 14.7; SD 3.7); decisional conflict was < 25; choice-preference for home versus hospital dialysis approximately 50:50. Patients valued receiving YoDDA, reading it on their own (96%), and sharing it with family (72%). The +YoDDA participants had higher scores for understanding kidney disease, reasoning about options, feeling in control, sharing their decision with family. Study engagement varied by center (estimated range 14 - 49%; mean 45%); participants varied in completion of decision quality measures. ♦ CONCLUSIONS: Receiving YoDDA as part of predialysis education was valued and useful to patients with worsening kidney disease. Integrating YoDDA actively within predialysis programs will meet clinical guidelines and patient need to support dialysis decision making in the context of patients' lifestyle.

"I suddenly felt I'd aged": a qualitative study of patient experiences of polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR).

OBJECTIVES: To explore patient experiences of living with, and receiving treatment for, PMR. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews, with 22 patients with PMR recruited from general practices in South Yorkshire. Thematic analysis using a constant comparative method, ran concurrently with the interviews and was used to derive a conceptual framework. RESULTS: 5 Key themes emerged highlighting the importance of: (1) pain, stiffness and weakness, (2) disability, (3) treatment and disease course, (4) experience of care, (5) psychological impact of PMR. Patients emphasised the profound disability experienced that was often associated with fear and vulnerability, highlighting how this was often not recognised by health care professionals. Patients' experiences also challenge medical convention, particularly around the concept of 'weakness' as a symptom, the use of morning stiffness as a measure of disease activity and the myth of full resolution of symptoms with steroid treatment. Treatment decisions were complex, with patients balancing glucocorticoid side effects against persistent symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Patients often described their experience of PMR in terms of disability rather than focussing on localised symptoms. The associated psychological impact was significant. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Recognising this is key to achieving shared understanding, reaching the correct diagnosis promptly, and formulating a patient-centred management plan.

Using continuous sedation until death for cancer patients: a qualitative interview study of physicians' and nurses' practice in three European countries.

BACKGROUND: Extensive debate surrounds the practice of continuous sedation until death to control refractory symptoms in terminal cancer care. We examined reported practice of United Kingdom, Belgian and Dutch physicians and nurses. METHODS: Qualitative case studies using interviews. SETTING: Hospitals, the domestic home and hospices or palliative care units. PARTICIPANTS: In all, 57 Physicians and 73 nurses involved in the care of 84 cancer patients. RESULTS: UK respondents reported a continuum of practice from the provision of low doses of sedatives to control terminal restlessness to rarely encountered deep sedation. In contrast, Belgian respondents predominantly described the use of deep sedation, emphasizing the importance of responding to the patient's request. Dutch respondents emphasized making an official medical decision informed by the patient's wish and establishing that a refractory symptom was present. Respondents employed rationales that showed different stances towards four key issues: the preservation of consciousness, concerns about the potential hastening of death, whether they perceived continuous sedation until death as an 'alternative' to euthanasia and whether they sought to follow guidelines or frameworks for practice. CONCLUSION: This qualitative analysis suggests that there is systematic variation in end-of-life care sedation practice and its conceptualization in the United Kingdom, Belgium and the Netherlands.

The language of sedation in end-of-life care: The ethical reasoning of care providers in three countries.

The application of ethically controversial medical procedures may differ from one place to another. Drawing on a keyword and text-mining analysis of 156 interviews with doctors and nurses involved in end-of-life care ('care providers'), differences between countries in care providers' ethical rationales for the use of sedation are reported. In the United Kingdom, an emphasis on titrating doses proportionately against symptoms is more likely, maintaining consciousness where possible. The potential harms of sedation are perceived to be the potential hastening of social as well as biological death. In Belgium and the Netherlands, although there is concern to distinguish the practice from euthanasia, rapid inducement of deep unconsciousness is more acceptable to care providers. This is often perceived to be a proportionate response to unbearable suffering in a context where there is also greater pressure to hasten dying from relatives and others. This means that sedation is more likely to be organised like euthanasia, as the end 'moment' is reached, and family farewells are organised before the patient is made unconscious for ever. Medical and nursing practices are partly responses to factors outside the place of care, such as legislation and public sentiment. Dutch guidelines for sedation largely tally with the practices prevalent in the Netherlands and Belgium, in contrast with those produced by the more international European Association for Palliative Care whose authors describe an ethical framework closer to that reportedly used by UK care providers.

Descriptions by general practitioners and nurses of their collaboration in continuous sedation until death at home: in-depth qualitative interviews in three European countries.

CONTEXT: One palliative care approach that is increasingly being used at home for relieving intolerable suffering in terminally ill patients is continuous sedation until death. Its provision requires a multidisciplinary team approach, with adequate collaboration and communication. However, it is unknown how general practitioners (GPs) and home care nurses experience being involved in the use of sedation at home. OBJECTIVES: To present case-based GP and nurse descriptions of their collaboration, roles, and responsibilities during the process of continuous sedation until death at home in Belgium, The Netherlands, and the U.K. METHODS: We held in-depth qualitative interviews with 25 GPs and 26 nurses closely involved in the care of 29 adult cancer patients who received continuous sedation until death at home. RESULTS: We found that, in Belgium and The Netherlands, it was the GP who typically made the final decision to use sedation, whereas in the U.K., it was predominantly the nurse who both encouraged the GP to prescribe anticipatory medication and decided when to use the prescription. Nurses in the three countries reported that they commonly perform and monitor sedation in the absence of the GP, which they reported to experience as "emotionally burdensome." CONCLUSION: We found variety among the countries studied regarding the decision making and provision of continuous sedation until death at home. These differences, among others, may be the result of different organizational contexts in the three countries such as the use of anticipatory medication in the U.K.

A 'combined framework' approach to developing a patient decision aid: the PANDAs model.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of practical research frameworks to guide the development of patient decision aids [PtDAs]. This paper described how a PtDA was developed using the International Patient Decision Aids (IPDAS) guideline and UK Medical Research Council (UKMRC) frameworks to support patients when making treatment decisions in type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This study used mixed methods to develop a PtDA for use in a UK general practice setting. A 10-member expert panel was convened to guide development and patients and clinicians were also interviewed individually using semi-structured interview guides to identify their decisional needs. Current literature was reviewed systematically to determine the best available evidence. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework was used to guide the presentation of the information and value clarification exercise. An iterative draft-review-revise process by the research team and review panel was conducted until the PtDA reached content and format 'saturation'. The PtDA was then pilot-tested by users in actual consultations to assess its acceptability and feasibility. The IPDAS and UKMRC frameworks were used throughout to inform the development process. RESULTS: The PANDAs PtDA was developed systematically and iteratively. Patients and clinicians highlighted the needs for information, decisional, emotional and social support, which were incorporated into the PtDA. The literature review identified gaps in high quality evidence and variations in patient outcome reporting. The PtDA comprised five components: background of the treatment options; pros and cons of each treatment option; value clarification exercise; support needs; and readiness to decide. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated the feasibility of combining the IPDAS and the UKMRC frameworks for the development and evaluation of a PtDA. Future studies should test this model for developing PtDAs across different decisions and healthcare contexts.