Assessment and Treatment of Abnormal Involuntary Movements: A Clinically Focused Narrative Review.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After participating in this CME activity, the psychiatrist should be better able to:• Categorize and describe different types of abnormal involuntary movements (AIMs).• Identify assessment tools and treatment options for AIMs. ABSTRACT: Abnormal involuntary movements (AIMs) comprise a diverse group of movement disorders characterized by uncontrolled and unintended movements (e.g., tremors, tics, dystonia). AIMs can occur at any stage of life and pose significant challenges for clinicians. It is difficult to determine their underlying causes due to the complex neurobiological mechanisms involved. Therefore, it is crucial to quantify the severity and progression of AIMs using well-validated measurement scales, such as the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS). By employing reliable assessment approaches, clinicians can objectively evaluate the motoric manifestations of AIMs and track them over time. Treatment of AIMs varies depending on their nature and etiology. While AIMs often respond to treatment, serious side effects can undermine treatment efficacy. In this clinically focused narrative review, we categorize different types of AIMs and discuss their neurobiological aspects. Further, we emphasize the importance of using well-validated measurement scales for accurate assessment and discuss available treatment modalities that target the specific AIMs manifestations. Additionally, we cover the need for comprehensive care to address the multifaceted nature of AIMs, accounting for their physical manifestations as well as their psychological, social, and functional toll on patients. By embracing a multidisciplinary approach, health care professionals can provide patient-centered care that promotes overall well-being and enhances the lives of patients coping with AIMs. Regular follow-up assessments are necessary to monitor treatment response, adjust medications when needed, and provide ongoing support for individuals affected by AIMs.

Mobile Vaccine Clinics for Patients With Serious Mental Illness and Health Care Workers in Outpatient Mental Health Clinics.

OBJECTIVE: People with serious mental illness are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 but face barriers to vaccinations. The authors describe the implementation of a mobile vaccine clinic at an outpatient mental health clinic for patients and health care workers to increase vaccination rates. METHODS: In late 2021, mobile vaccine clinics were held in collaboration with a local pharmacy to provide COVID-19 and influenza vaccines to patients and health care workers. Participants in one clinic were asked to fill out a questionnaire about their experience. RESULTS: Of 69 individuals who completed the questionnaire, 96% received the COVID-19 booster and 17% received the seasonal flu vaccine. Most patients and health care workers reported that the mobile vaccine clinic was easily accessible and preferable and that they would recommend it. Moreover, the mobile vaccine clinic was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Mobile vaccine clinics can improve vaccine access for patients and health care workers in community mental health settings and can be cost-effective.

Increasing COVID-19 Vaccination Rates Among Patients With Serious Mental Illness: A Pilot Intervention Study.

OBJECTIVE: This pilot project aimed to maximize COVID-19 vaccine uptake among patients with serious mental illness. Psychiatric providers were engaged to directly address COVID-19 vaccine-related concerns with patients during outpatient visits. METHODS: A quality improvement project encouraged COVID-19 vaccinations in a cohort of outpatients treated with clozapine (N=193, ages 19-81 years, mean age=46.4 years) at a community mental health center. In-service education was provided to clinicians to identify vaccine-hesitant patients and build vaccine confidence. A vaccination-monitoring tool was created and embedded in patients' electronic medical records. Starting in February 2021, the tool guided semistructured interviews at each visit and supported population-based management. RESULTS: The full COVID-19 vaccination rate by June 30, 2021, was 84% among the outpatients, compared with the estimated state rate on the same date of between 62.1% and 77.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The active involvement of psychiatric providers in preventive health care can help increase vaccination rates among patients with serious mental illness.

Managing Clozapine in Primary Care Settings.

The Psychiatric Consultation Service at Massachusetts General Hospital sees medical and surgical inpatients with comorbid psychiatric symptoms and conditions. During their twice-weekly rounds, Dr Stern and other members of the Consultation Service discuss diagnosis and management of hospitalized patients with complex medical or surgical problems who also demonstrate psychiatric symptoms or conditions. These discussions have given rise to rounds reports that will prove useful for clinicians practicing at the interface of medicine and psychiatry.

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Collaborative Lung Cancer Screening Educational Intervention Tailored for Individuals With Serious Mental Illness.

PURPOSE: Individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) experience disparities in lung cancer mortality. Using a two-phase, mixed-methods approach, we developed a person-centered lung cancer screening (LCS) educational intervention (phase 1) for individuals with SMI (schizophrenia and bipolar disorder) and evaluated acceptability, feasibility, and changes in attitudes toward LCS (phase 2). METHODS: Phase 1: We conducted three focus groups with mental health, primary care, and radiology clinicians and utilized rapid qualitative analysis to adapt the LCS intervention (LCS walk-through video and smoking cessation handouts) tailored for individuals with SMI. Phase 2: We enrolled LCS-eligible patients with SMI (n = 15) and assessed the feasibility (>50% enrollment; >75% completion) and acceptability (>75% overall satisfaction) of an LCS educational intervention delivered by a radiologist and a mental health clinician at a community mental health clinic. We explored changes in participant attitudes about lung cancer, LCS, and smoking before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Phase 1: Focus groups with primary care (n = 5), radiologists (n = 9), and mental health clinicians (n = 6) recommended person-centered language and adapting a video demonstrating the process of LCS to address concerns specific to SMI, including paranoia and concrete thinking. Phase 2: Fifty percent (15 of 30) of eligible patients enrolled in the LCS intervention, 100% (15 of 15) completed the intervention, and 93% (14 of 15) were satisfied with the intervention. Participants reported a significantly greater worry about developing lung cancer postintervention, but there were no other significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists can partner with primary care and community mental health clinics to lead equity efforts in LCS among individuals with SMI.