The caregiving experience: How much do health professionals understand?

Legal, social and economic factors have changed the delivery of care to people who have a mental disorder. Many of these people are now treated in the community and they live with or in close proximity to their family. The aim of this paper is to provide health professionals with an insight into the experience of being a caregiver to a person with a mental disorder. For these families caregiving becomes an integral part of everyday life.Positive outcomes for both the caregiver and the ill family member are more likely to occur when effective levels of collaboration exist between health professionals and caregivers. Collaboration is enhanced when caregivers and health professionals value each other's contribution to the ill family member's care. Often the burden, stress, and socio-economic effects on the family caring for a person with mental illness is not sufficiently appreciated and further increases this burden. A review of the literature from the caregiver's perception is presented. An increased understanding of the caregiving experience will enable health professionals to develop and implement strategies that facilitate positive outcomes for the caregiver and the ill family member

CRIMSON [CRisis plan IMpact: Subjective and Objective coercion and eNgagement] Protocol: A randomised controlled trial of joint crisis plans to reduce compulsory treatment of people with psychosis

Background: The use of compulsory treatment under the Mental Health Act (MHA) has continued to rise in the UK and in other countries. The Joint Crisis Plan (JCP) is a statement of service users' wishes for treatment in the event of a future mental health crisis. It is developed with the clinical team and an independent facilitator. A recent pilot RCT showed a reduction in the use of the MHA amongst service users with a JCP. The JCP is the only intervention that has been shown to reduce compulsory treatment in this way. The CRIMSON trial aims to determine if JCPs, compared with treatment as usual, are effective in reducing the use of the MHA in a range of treatment settings across the UK. Methods/Design: This is a 3 centre, individual-level, single-blind, randomised controlled trial of the JCP compared with treatment as usual for people with a history of relapsing psychotic illness in Birmingham, London and Lancashire/Manchester. 540 service users will be recruited across the three sites. Eligible service users will be adults with a diagnosis of a psychotic disorder (including bipolar disorder), treated in the community under the Care Programme Approach with at least one admission to a psychiatric inpatient ward in the previous two years. Current inpatients and those subject to a community treatment order will be excluded to avoid any potential perceived pressure to participate. Research assessments will be conducted at baseline and 18 months. Following the baseline assessment, eligible service users will be randomly allocated to either develop a Joint Crisis Plan or continue with treatment as usual. Outcome will be assessed at 18 months with assessors blind to treatment allocation. The primary outcome is the proportion of service users treated or otherwise detained under an order of the Mental Health Act (MHA) during the follow-up period, compared across randomisation groups. Secondary outcomes include overall costs, service user engagement, perceived coercion and therapeutic relationships. Sub-analyses will explore the effectiveness of the JCP in reducing use of the MHA specifically for Black Caribbean and Black African service users (combined). Qualitative investigations with staff and service users will explore the acceptability of the JCPs. Discussion: JCPs offer a potential solution to the rise of compulsory treatment for individuals with psychotic disorders and, if shown to be effective in this trial, they are likely to be of interest to mental health service providers worldwide

The genetics of nicotine addiction liability: Ethical and social policy implications

Aim To assess the promise and risks of technological applications of genetic research on liability to develop nicotine dependence. Methods We reviewed (i) the evidence on the genetics of nicotine dependence; (ii) the technical feasibility of using genetic information to reduce smoking uptake and increase cessation; and (iii) policy and ethical issues raised by the uses of genetic information on addiction liability. Results (i) Despite evidence from twin studies that genes contribute to addiction susceptibility, research to date has not identified commonly occurring alleles that are strongly predictive of developing nicotine addiction. Nicotine addiction is likely to involve multiple alleles of small effect that interact with each other and with the environment. (ii) Population screening for susceptibility alleles is unlikely to be effective or cost-effective. Tailoring of smoking cessation treatments with genetic information is more plausible but results to date have been disappointing. Population health strategies such as increased taxation and reduced opportunities to smoke are more efficient in reducing cigarette smoking. Tobacco harm reduction policies applied to populations may also play a role in reducing tobacco-related harm. (iii) Future uses of genomic information on addiction risk will need to assess the risks of medicalising addiction (e.g. pessimism about capacity to quit) and community concerns about genetic privacy. Conclusions Nicotine genomics is a very new and underdeveloped field. On the evidence to date, its advocates would be wise to avoid extravagant claims about its preventive applications