Abdominal computed tomography measurements of body composition and waitlist mortality in kidney transplant candidates.

Body mass index is often used to determine kidney transplant (KT) candidacy. However, this measure of body composition (BC) has several limitations, including the inability to accurately capture dry weight. Objective computed tomography (CT)-based measures may improve pre-KT risk stratification and capture physiological aging more accurately. We quantified the association between CT-based BC measurements and waitlist mortality in a retrospective study of 828 KT candidates (2010-2022) with clinically obtained CT scans using adjusted competing risk regression. In total, 42.5% of candidates had myopenia, 11.4% had myopenic obesity (MO), 68.8% had myosteatosis, 24.8% had sarcopenia (probable = 11.2%, confirmed = 10.5%, and severe = 3.1%), and 8.6% had sarcopenic obesity. Myopenia, MO, and sarcopenic obesity were not associated with mortality. Patients with myosteatosis (adjusted subhazard ratio [aSHR] = 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-2.45; after confounder adjustment) or sarcopenia (probable: aSHR = 1.78, 95% CI: 1.10-2.88; confirmed: aSHR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.01-2.82; and severe: aSHR = 2.51, 95% CI: 1.12-5.66; after full adjustment) were at increased risk of mortality. When stratified by age, MO (aSHR = 2.21, 95% CI: 1.28-3.83; P interaction = .005) and myosteatosis (aSHR = 1.95, 95% CI: 1.18-3.21; P interaction = .038) were associated with elevated risk only among candidates <65 years. MO was only associated with waitlist mortality among frail candidates (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.54, 95% CI: 1.28-5.05; P interaction = .021). Transplant centers should consider using BC metrics in addition to body mass index when a CT scan is available to improve pre-KT risk stratification at KT evaluation.

What helps people to reduce or stop self-harm? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of first-hand accounts.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm is an important public health problem but therapeutic interventions, particularly for people who have a history of multiple repetition, are not always taken up or effective when they are. The aim of this review is to explore first-hand accounts of what helps outside therapy and identify actions and processes, which can support the reduction or cessation of self-harm. METHODS: A systematic review and thematic meta-synthesis of the first-person accounts of what has helped to reduce or stop self-harm reported in primary studies. RESULTS: The meta-synthesis combined 546 participant excerpts from 56 studies. Two over-arching themes were identified: (i) breaking the chain incorporated actions taken to break the link between a person's current psychological or social state and the act of self-harm and (ii) building a new foundation for change captured actions over the longer-term, focusing on practical changes in relationships and in a person's way of life, such as work or living arrangements. CONCLUSIONS: The results emphasize the importance of interpersonal change in reducing or stopping self-harm. While interpersonal factors are acknowledged as important reasons behind self-harm, they are often under-represented in self-management advice and therapeutic interventions that focus on individual psychopathology.

Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Opportunistic Screening and Stepped-care Interventions for Older Alcohol Users in Primary Care.

AIMS: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care intervention versus a minimal intervention for the treatment of older hazardous alcohol users in primary care. METHOD: Multi-centre, pragmatic RCT, set in Primary Care in UK. Patients aged ≥ 55 years scoring ≥ 8 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test were allocated either to 5-min of brief advice or to 'Stepped Care': an initial 20-min of behavioural change counselling, with Step 2 being three sessions of Motivational Enhancement Therapy and Step 3 referral to local alcohol services (progression between each Step being determined by outcomes 1 month after each Step). Outcome measures included average drinks per day, AUDIT-C, alcohol-related problems using the Drinking Problems Index, health-related quality of life using the Short Form 12, costs measured from a NHS/Personal Social Care perspective and estimated health gains in quality adjusted life-years measured assessed EQ-5D. RESULTS: Both groups reduced alcohol consumption at 12 months but the difference between groups was small and not significant. No significant differences were observed between the groups on secondary outcomes. In economic terms stepped care was less costly and more effective than the minimal intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Stepped care does not confer an advantage over a minimal intervention in terms of reduction in alcohol use for older hazardous alcohol users in primary care. However, stepped care has a greater probability of being more cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials ISRCTN52557360. SHORT SUMMARY: A stepped care approach was compared with brief intervention for older at-risk drinkers attending primary care. While consumption reduced in both groups over 12 months there was no significant difference between the groups. An economic analysis indicated the stepped care which had a greater probability of being more cost-effective than brief intervention.

Valued attributes of professional support for people who repeatedly self-harm: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of first-hand accounts.

Therapeutic interventions are an important adjunct to self-help strategies for people who self-harm. There is little guidance for those offering therapy on the effective components of interventions for people who self-harm. This was a systematic review aiming to identify the factors that contribute to positive experiences of therapy as described by people who have reduced or stopped self-harm. The review followed PRISMA guidelines to locate and synthesize peer-reviewed qualitative studies describing experiences of therapy among people who had reduced or stopped self-harm. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were peer reviewed and conducted for at least two researchers independently. Relevant first-hand quotations were extracted from eligible studies and synthesized using a thematic analysis in collaboration with experts with personal and professional experience of self-harm. Twenty-three studies met eligibility criteria. Themes identified in the reported accounts were arranged under two meta-themes. 'Positive aspects of seeing a professional' identified aspects of professional care that were common to all encounters: the value of sharing, space to talk and reflect, and the boundaries inherent in contact with a professional. 'Positive attributes of individual professionals' depended upon individual characteristics: the ability to build reciprocal trust by being non-judgemental, showing genuine empathic concern, and being confident to talk about and respond directly to self-harm. Our review indicates that therapeutic alliance is perceived as key to effective professional help for self-harm, irrespective of underlying principles of therapy. All forms of therapy should be timely and reliable and centred around the needs of the individual and their experience of self-harm.

Understanding the functions of repeated self-harm: A Q methodology approach.

BACKGROUND: Multiple repetition of self-harm is common and is associated with poor quality of life and with an increased risk of suicide. Treatment outside specialist clinics rarely takes account of what is known about the varied and conflicting reasons for multiple repetition. We aimed to identify ways in which individuals who self-harm make sense of their motivations for repetition. METHODS: In 2018/2019 we recruited 59 participants from NHS services, support organizations in England and via social media into a Q-methodology study. Participants sorted, ranked and commented on 46 separate functions of self-harm according to whether they agreed or disagreed with them as reasons for their own self-harm. The functions were identified from a range of academic sources and first-person accounts. RESULTS: Principal Component Analysis was used to identify four distinct accounts for repeated self-harm: 1) Managing my mental state, 2) Communicating Distress, 3) Distract from suicidal thoughts or feelings and 4) Producing positive feelings. There were no clear links between account and gender or other respondent characteristic, although those who self-harmed most regularly and frequently ('so many times I've lost count') were mostly in Accounts 1 and 4. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to use Q methodology to explore reasons for repeated self-harm. The accounts identified can help in personalizing therapy by going beyond models that focus on a single function such as affect regulation or experiential avoidance, while reducing the field to a manageable number of points of view that can be explored in therapy.

ADAPTA: A pilot randomised controlled trial of an alcohol-focused intervention versus a healthy living intervention for problem drinkers identified in a general hospital setting.

AIM: To examine the relative feasibility, acceptability, applicability, effectiveness and explore cost-effectiveness of a healthy living focused intervention (HL) compared to an alcohol-focused intervention (AF) for problem drinkers identified in hospital. METHODS: A pragmatic, randomised, controlled, open pilot trial. Feasibility and acceptability were measured by recruitment, attrition, follow-up rates and number of treatment sessions attended. Effectiveness was measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test score at six months. Additional economic and secondary outcome measures were collected. RESULTS: Eighty-six participants were randomised and 72% (n=62) were retained in full participation. Forty-one participants attended at least one treatment session (48%). A greater proportion in the HL group attended all four treatment sessions (33% vs 19%). Follow-up rates were 29% at six months and 22% at twelve months. There was no evidence of a difference in AUDIT score between treatment groups at six months. Mean cost of health care and social services, policing and the criminal justice system use decreased while EQ-5D scores indicated minor improvement in both arms. However, this pilot trial was not powered to detect differences in either measure between groups. CONCLUSIONS: While no treatment effect was observed, this study demonstrated a potential to engage patients drinking at harmful or dependent levels in a healthy living intervention. However, recruitment proved challenging and follow-up rates were poor. Better ways need to be found to help these patients recognise the harms associated with their drinking and overcome the evident barriers to their engagement with specialist treatment.

Measuring clinically significant outcomes - LDQ, CORE-10 and SSQ as dimension measures of addiction.

Aims and method To determine values for reliable change and clinically significant change for the Leeds Dependence Questionnaire (LDQ) and Social Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ). The performance of these two measures with the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10) as three dimension measures of addiction was then explored. Results The reliable change statistic for both LDQ and SSQ was ⩾4; the cut-offs for clinically significant change were LDQ ⩽10 males, ⩽5 females, and SSQ ⩾16. There was no overlap of 95% CIs for means by gender between 'well-functioning' and pre- and post-treatment populations. Clinical implications These data enable the measurement of clinically significant change using the LDQ and SSQ and add to the evidence for the performance of the LDQ, CORE-10 and SSQ as dimension measures of addiction. The CORE-10 and SSQ can be used as treatment outcome measures for mental health problems other than addiction.

A systematic review of substance misuse assessment packages.

ISSUES: Health-care systems globally are moving away from process measures of performance to payments for outcomes achieved. It follows that there is a need for a selection of proven quality tools that are suitable for undertaking comprehensive assessments and outcomes assessments. This review aimed to identify and evaluate existing comprehensive assessment packages. The work is part of a national program in the UK, Collaborations in Leadership of Applied Health Research and Care. APPROACH: Systematic searches were carried out across major databases to identify instruments designed to assess substance misuse. For those instruments identified, searches were carried out using the Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE(®) and PsychINFO to identify articles reporting psychometric data. KEY FINDINGS: From 595 instruments, six met the inclusion criteria: Addiction Severity Index; Chemical Use, Abuse and Dependence Scale; Form 90; Maudsley Addiction Profile; Measurements in the Addictions for Triage and Evaluation; and Substance Abuse Outcomes Module. The most common reasons for exclusion were that instruments were: (i) designed for a specific substance (239); (ii) not designed for use in addiction settings (136); (iii) not providing comprehensive assessment (89); and (iv) not suitable as an outcome measure (20). IMPLICATIONS: The six packages are very different and suited to different uses. No package had adequate evaluation of their properties and so the emphasis should be on refining a small number of tools with very general application rather than creating new ones. An alternative to using 'off-the-shelf' packages is to create bespoke packages from well-validated, single-construct scales. [

An alcohol-focused intervention versus a healthy living intervention for problem drinkers identified in a general hospital setting (ADAPTA): study protocol for a randomized, controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol misuse is a major cause of premature mortality and ill health. Although there is a high prevalence of alcohol problems among patients presenting to general hospital, many of these people are not help seekers and do not engage in specialist treatment. Hospital admission is an opportunity to steer people towards specialist treatment, which can reduce health-care utilization and costs to the public sector and produce substantial individual health and social benefits. Alcohol misuse is associated with other lifestyle problems, which are amenable to intervention. It has been suggested that the development of a healthy or balanced lifestyle is potentially beneficial for reducing or abstaining from alcohol use, and relapse prevention. The aim of the study is to test whether or not the offer of a choice of health-related lifestyle interventions is more acceptable, and therefore able to engage more problem drinkers in treatment, than an alcohol-focused intervention. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a pragmatic, randomized, controlled, open pilot study in a UK general hospital setting with concurrent economic evaluation and a qualitative component. Potential participants are those admitted to hospital with a diagnosis likely to be responsive to addiction interventions who score equal to or more than 16 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). The main purpose of this pilot study is to evaluate the acceptability of two sorts of interventions (healthy living related versus alcohol focused) to the participants and to assess the components and processes of the design. Qualitative research will be undertaken to explore acceptability and the impact of the approach, assessment, recruitment and intervention on trial participants and non-participants. The effectiveness of the two treatments will be compared at 6 months using AUDIT scores as the primary outcome measure. There will be additional economic, qualitative and secondary outcome measurements. DISCUSSION: Development of the study was a collaboration between academics, commissioners and clinicians in general hospital and addiction services, made possible by the Collaboration in Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) program of research. CLAHRC was a necessary vehicle for overcoming the barriers to answering an important NHS question--how better to engage problem drinkers in a hospital setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN47728072.