Intensive community care services for children and young people in psychiatric crisis: an expert opinion.

BACKGROUND: Children and young people's (CYP) mental health is worsening, and an increasing number are seeking psychiatric and mental health care. Whilst many CYPs with low-to-medium levels of psychiatric distress can be treated in outpatient services, CYPs in crisis often require inpatient hospital treatment. Although necessary in many cases, inpatient care can be distressing for CYPs and their families. Amongst other things, inpatient stays often isolate CYPs from their support networks and disrupt their education. In response to such limitations, and in order to effectively support CYPs with complex mental health needs, intensive community-based treatment models, which are known in this paper as intensive community care services (ICCS), have been developed. Although ICCS have been developed in a number of settings, there is, at present, little to no consensus of what ICCS entails. METHODS: A group of child and adolescent mental health clinicians, researchers and academics convened in London in January 2023. They met to discuss and agree upon the minimum requirements of ICCS. The discussion was semi-structured and used the Dartmouth Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Scale as a framework. Following the meeting, the agreed features of ICCS, as described in this paper, were written up. RESULTS: ICCS was defined as a service which provides treatment primarily outside of hospital in community settings such as the school or home. Alongside this, ICCS should provide at least some out-of-hours support, and a minimum of 90% of CYPs should be supported at least twice per week. The maximum caseload should be approximately 5 clients per full time equivalent (FTE), and the minimum number of staff for an ICCS team should be 4 FTE. The group also confirmed the importance of supporting CYPs engagement with their communities and the need to remain flexible in treatment provision. Finally, the importance of robust evaluation utilising tools including the Children's Global Assessment Scale were agreed. CONCLUSIONS: This paper presents the agreed minimum requirements of intensive community-based psychiatric care. Using the parameters laid out herein, clinicians, academics, and related colleagues working in ICCS should seek to further develop the evidence base for this treatment model.

Practitioner Review: Common elements in treatments for youth suicide attempts and self-harm - a practitioner review based on review of treatment elements associated with intervention benefits.

BACKGROUND: Adopting a common elements approach, this practitioner review aims to highlight specific treatment elements that are common to interventions with demonstrated benefits in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for reducing suicide attempts and self-harm in youth. Identification of common treatment elements among effective interventions offers a key strategy for clarifying the most robust features of effective interventions and improving our ability to implement effective treatment and decrease the lag between scientific advances and clinical care. METHODS: A systematic search of RCTs evaluating interventions targeting suicide/self-harm in youth (ages 12-18) yielded a total of 18 RCTs assessing 16 different manualized interventions. An open coding process was used to identify common elements present within each intervention trial. Twenty-seven common elements were identified and classified into format, process, and content categories. All trials were coded for the inclusion of these common elements by two independent raters. RCTs were also classified into those where trial results supported improvements in suicide/self-harm behavior (n = 11 supported trials) and those without supported evidence (n = 7 unsupported trials). RESULTS: Compared with unsupported trials, the 11 supported trials shared the following elements: (a) inclusion of therapy for both the youth and family/caregivers; (b) an emphasis on relationship-building and the therapeutic alliance; (c) utilization of an individualized case conceptualization to guide treatment; (d) provided skills training (e.g. emotion regulation skills) to both youth and their parents/caregivers; and (e) lethal means restriction counseling as part of self-harm monitoring and safety planning. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights key treatment elements associated with efficacy that community practitioners can incorporate in their treatments for youth presenting with suicide/self-harm behaviors.

Pandemic-related emergency psychiatric presentations for self-harm of children and adolescents in 10 countries (PREP-kids): a retrospective international cohort study.

To examine the differences in hospital emergency psychiatric presentations for self-harm of children and adolescents during the covid-19 lockdown in March and April 2020 compared with the same period in 2019. Retrospective cohort study. We used electronic patient records from 23 hospital emergency departments in ten countries grouped into 14 areas. We examined data on 2073 acute hospital presentations by 1795 unique children and adolescents through age 18. We examined the total number of emergency psychiatric hospital presentations and the proportion of children and adolescents presenting with severe self-harm as our two main outcome measures. In addition, we examined sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and clinical management variables for those presenting with self-harm. To compare the number of hospital presentations between 2020 and 2019 a negative binomial model was used. For other variables, individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses were carried out. Emergency psychiatric hospital presentations decreased from 1239 in 2019 to 834 in 2020, incident rate ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.62-0.73; p < 0.001. The proportion of children and adolescents presenting with self-harm increased from 50% in 2019 to 57% in 2020, odds ratio 1.33, 1.07-1.64; p = 0.009 but there was no difference in the proportion presenting with severe self-harm. Within the subpopulation presenting with self-harm the proportion of children and adolescents presenting with emotional disorders increased from 58 to 66%, odds ratio 1.58, 1.06-2.36; p = 0.025. The proportion of children and adolescents admitted to an observation ward also decreased from 13 to 9% in 2020, odds ratio 0.52, 0.28-0.96; p = 0.036. Service planners should consider that, during a lockdown, there are likely to be fewer emergency psychiatric presentations. Many children and adolescents with psychiatric emergencies might not receive any service. A focus on developing intensive community care services with outreach capabilities should be prioritised.

Supported discharge service versus inpatient care evaluation (SITE): a randomised controlled trial comparing effectiveness of an intensive community care service versus inpatient treatment as usual for adolescents with severe psychiatric disorders: self-harm, functional impairment, and educational and clinical outcomes.

Clinical guidelines recommend intensive community care service treatment (ICCS) to reduce adolescent psychiatric inpatient care. We have previously reported that the addition of ICCS led to a substantial decrease in hospital use and improved school re-integration. The aim of this study is to undertake a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing an inpatient admission followed by an early discharge supported by ICCS with usual inpatient admission (treatment as usual; TAU). In this paper, we report the impact of ICCS on self-harm and other clinical and educational outcomes. 106 patients aged 12-18 admitted for psychiatric inpatient care were randomised (1:1) to either ICCS or TAU. Six months after randomisation, we compared the two treatment arms on the number and severity of self-harm episodes, the functional impairment, severity of psychiatric symptoms, clinical improvement, reading and mathematical ability, weight, height and the use of psychological therapy and medication. At six-month follow-up, there were no differences between the two groups on most measures. Patients receiving ICCS were significantly less likely to report multiple episodes (five or more) of self-harm (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.05-0.64). Patients admitted to private inpatient units spent on average 118.4 (95% CI: 28.2-208.6) fewer days in hospitals if they were in the ICCS group compared to TAU. The addition of ICCS to TAU may lower the risk of multiple self-harm and may reduce the duration of inpatient stay, especially in those patients admitted for private care. Early discharge with ICCS appears to be a viable alternative to standard inpatient treatment.

Commentary: Defining self-harm: how inconsistencies in language persist - a commentary/reflection on Ward and Curran (2021).

Self-harm definition is an important focus of academic research and clinical practice. The precise definition of self-harm has been contested for decades, and current terminology varies across, and sometimes within, countries. This commentary has been written to highlight the problematic use of the term 'deliberate' self-harm (i.e. DSH) and to clarify the terminology currently recommended by clinical agencies in the United Kingdom. Comparisons will be made to other definitions in the field, such as non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), with the aim of contributing to the worldwide discussion about how we conceptualise, discuss and treat suicidal and non-suicidal behaviours. The commentary concludes by highlighting the findings of Ward and Curran (2021). It is suggested that undiagnosed ADHD may be a potential driver for self-harm, particularly among girls, further highlighting the ongoing challenges in identifying and predicting which youth are at risk for self-harm and suicidal behaviours. Central to this challenge has been the long-standing confusion around the best way to define self-harm.

Guidance for identification and treatment of individuals with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder based upon expert consensus.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with co-occurring hyperactivity disorder/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) can have complex presentations that may complicate diagnosis and treatment. There are established guidelines with regard to the identification and treatment of ADHD and ASD as independent conditions. However, ADHD and ASD were not formally recognised diagnostically as co-occurring conditions until the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5 (DSM-5) was published in 2013. Hence, awareness and understanding of both conditions when they co-occur is less established and there is little guidance in the clinical literature. This has led to uncertainty among healthcare practitioners when working with children, young people and adults who present with co-existing ADHD and ASD. The United Kingdom ADHD Partnership (UKAP) therefore convened a meeting of professional experts that aimed to address this gap and reach expert consensus on the topic that will aid healthcare practitioners and allied professionals when working with this complex and vulnerable population. METHOD: UK experts from multiple disciplines in the fields of ADHD and ASD convened in London in December 2017. The meeting provided the opportunity to address the complexities of ADHD and ASD as a co-occurring presentation from different perspectives and included presentations, discussion and group work. The authors considered the clinical challenges of working with this complex group of individuals, producing a consensus for a unified approach when working with male and female, children, adolescents and adults with co-occurring ADHD and ASD. This was written up, circulated and endorsed by all authors. RESULTS: The authors reached a consensus of practical recommendations for working across the lifespan with males and females with ADHD and ASD. Consensus was reached on topics of (1) identification and assessment using rating scales, clinical diagnostic interviews and objective supporting assessments; outcomes of assessment, including standards of clinical reporting; (2) non-pharmacological interventions and care management, including psychoeducation, carer interventions/carer training, behavioural/environmental and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) approaches; and multi-agency liaison, including educational interventions, career advice, occupational skills and training, and (3) pharmacological treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The guidance and practice recommendations (Tables 1, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 10) will support healthcare practitioners and allied professionals to meet the needs of this complex group from a multidisciplinary perspective. Further research is needed to enhance our understanding of the diagnosis, treatment and management of individuals presenting with comorbid ADHD and ASD.

Editorial: Suicide and self-harm: advancing from science to preventing deaths.

Globally, suicide is the second leading cause of death among youth ages 15-29-years, and self-harm is one of the strongest known predictors of death by suicide. This editorial introduces the Special Issue on suicide and self-harm, emphasizing the research and policy implications of the included articles. By illustrating advances in our science, the Special Issue both celebrates our achievements and highlights the need to use our science to inform suicide prevention policy and practice to reduce the tragedy of suicide and premature deaths.

No better than chance? Developments in predicting adolescent suicide, a commentary on Mars et al. (2018) and Beckman et al. (2018).

Suicide is the second leading cause of death in young people aged 10-24 globally (Patton et al., 2009) and it is therefore of vital importance that we understand more about how to identify those at risk. Many of those who proceed to die by suicide will not have interacted with mental health services (Kidger et al., 2012), and therefore predictors of suicide attempts and completed suicides are relevant not only to mental health services but also to schools and communities. Despite years of research, it continues to be challenging to identify those young people who undergo transition from thinking about suicide to attempting suicide as well as those young people who undergo transition from self-harm to completed suicide. This commentary will look at the two accompanying papers by Mars et al. (2018) and Beckman et al. (2018); which seek to increase our understanding of which children and young people may proceed to engage with self-harm and die by suicide.

Editorial: The job of an editor.

The job of an editor is exciting, fraught with difficulties, friend-making, enemy-making, time-eating, time-saving, but above all, it is exciting. I took over from Jane Barlow in November 2018. First, I would like to thank her for her work. I do not just say this: Jane has made my work easy in many ways. She has steered the journal to become a recognisable presence in our field, with an impact factor, a growing number of downloads and high aspirations of participation in PubMed Central. The job of an editor is also to extend the success of previous editors. The way I see it is that CAMH should continue to grow to become one of the leading sources for clinically relevant knowledge worldwide. I would like you, our readers, to think of CAMH whenever you need clinical advice.

Editorial: The job of an editor-one year on.

Incredible as it still sounds to me, it has now been a year since I took over as the editor-in-chief of Child and Adolescent Mental Health. It is time to both look back and look forward. Over the past year, my approach remained unchanged: CAMH should grow to become a leading source of the most clinically relevant knowledge worldwide in our field. I would like you, our readers, to think of CAMH whenever you need clinical advice, a research update, or an innovative service development idea.

Review: Alternatives to inpatient care for children and adolescents with mental health disorders.

BACKGROUND: Intensive community services may provide an alternative to inpatient care but there is little systematic evidence of their efficacy. This article provides a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting efficacy of intensive community services versus inpatient care in youth. METHOD: Data sources were identified by searching Medline, PsychINFO and EMBASE databases as of December 2014. RCTs comparing intensive community services versus inpatient care in children and adolescents (through age 18) were included. RESULTS: Six unique RCTs including 569 youth were identified. The RCTs examined the efficacy of specialist outpatient treatment, multisystemic therapy, day patient treatment, intensive home treatment and supported discharge services versus inpatient care. Using intensive community services was associated with clinical improvements similar to inpatient care in most studies. Where differences in clinical outcomes existed, they tended to favour intensive community treatment. Using intensive community services was associated with shorter hospitalizations, lower costs and greater patient satisfaction. There were no independent replications of the results. Few studies investigated the use of intensive community treatment as an alternative to inpatient care in children and adolescents with severe immediate risk to self and others. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive community services appear to be a viable alternative to inpatient care. Independent replication of results achieved by specific intensive community treatment models is a research priority.

Help-seeking behaviour and adolescent self-harm: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Self-harm is common in adolescence, but most young people who self-harm do not seek professional help. The aim of this literature review was to determine (a) the sources of support adolescents who self-harm access if they seek help, and (b) the barriers and facilitators to help-seeking for adolescents who self-harm. METHOD: Using a pre-defined search strategy we searched databases for terms related to self-harm, adolescents and help-seeking. Studies were included in the review if participants were aged 11-19 years. RESULTS: Twenty articles met criteria for inclusion. Between a third and one half of adolescents who self-harm do not seek help for this behaviour. Of those who seek help, results showed adolescents primarily turned to friends and family for support. The Internet may be more commonly used as a tool for self-disclosure rather than asking for help. Barriers to help-seeking included fear of negative reactions from others including stigmatisation, fear of confidentiality being breached and fear of being seen as 'attention-seeking'. Few facilitators of help-seeking were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Of the small proportion of adolescents who seek help for their self-harm, informal sources are the most likely support systems accessed. Interpersonal barriers and a lack of knowledge about where to go for help may impede help-seeking. Future research should address the lack of knowledge regarding the facilitators of help-seeking behaviour in order to improve the ability of services to engage with this vulnerable group of young people.

Innovations in Practice: pilot evaluation of the supported discharge service (SDS): clinical outcomes and service use.

BACKGROUND: The Supported Discharge Service (SDS) is a model of enhanced care in the community for adolescents after inpatient discharge. METHODS: This study comprised the first 20 patients referred to SDS, largely those with delayed discharges. Service use and clinical outcomes were collected and predictors of total contact time were investigated. RESULTS: Significant improvements had been made with SDS. Higher baseline Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) conduct scores were associated with less contact time. CONCLUSIONS: SDS is a feasible model of care. Adolescents with conduct problems may benefit from engagement strategies. Further rigorous evaluation of the model is required.

Editorial: How Can We Best Support Suicidal Youth? New Evidence for Dialectical Behavior Therapy and Different Forms of Self-Harm.

Establishing effective treatments for youth at risk of suicide is one of the most pressing and important tasks within child and adolescent psychiatry. Self-harm, which includes suicide attempt (SA), nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), and nonsuicidal self-poisoning, is one of the strongest predictors of suicide.1 Youth who engage in self-harm or experience mental health crisis are becoming more and more common, at increasingly younger ages, and so confidence in treatments to successfully reduce self-harm and prevent relapse and recurrence is crucial.2 However, the evidence base for such treatments is severely lacking despite some progress in the field.3-5 Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) is the most established treatment option, but even so, the evidence comes from just a handful of studies and primarily focuses on the ability of DBT to reduce the repetition of self-harm. Whether DBT is successful in supporting young people along their recovery journey and is equally effective at treating different forms of self-harm are yet to be properly explored.

Editorial perspective: protective factors following cumulative childhood adversity.

Adverse childhood experiences can have a significant impact on adult psychosocial outcomes. However, negative outcomes are not inevitable, and protective factors can interrupt the realisation of negative developmental trajectories and result in positive adaptation in spite of childhood adversity. Interventions that promote social support, encourage education and academic achievement, and address specific personality and dispositional factors are likely to beneficial for those with experience of childhood adversity. Holistic assessment that considers both neurodevelopmental conditions and trauma symptoms is also important for promoting resilience and avoiding assumptions that mental and behavioural problems in children with cumulative adversity are purely 'social'.

Association between continuity of care and attendance of post-discharge follow-up after psychiatric emergency presentation.

The number of accident and emergency (A&E) hospital attendances by young people aged 18 or under with a recorded diagnosis of a psychiatric condition more than tripled between 2010 and 2022. After discharge from the hospital, attendance at follow-up appointments in the community is critical to ensure the safety of young people and optimise the use of clinical resources. A retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the association between follow-up attendance and the continuity of clinicians and clinical teams, using electronic clinical record data from East London NHS Foundation Trust (ELFT), between April 2019 and March 2022. Multi-level mixed effects logistic regression was performed to model the follow-up attendance odds based on whether the same or different clinician and clinical team offered the initial A&E and the community follow-up appointment or whether a crisis team was involved. 3134 A&E presentations by 2368 young people were identified within the study period. Following these presentations, 2091 follow-up appointments in the community were offered. The attendance rate increased by more than three times if the follow-up appointment was offered by the same clinician who saw the young person in A&E (odds ratio (OR) = 3.66; 95% CI 1.65-8.13). Whether the same clinical team provided the community follow-up appointment, or whether a crisis team was involved before discharge made no difference to the likelihood of follow-up attendance. The findings support the importance of the continuity of clinicians in the care of young people in crisis.