Emotional expression during attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders treatment: initial assessment of treatment effects.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this research was to provide an initial examination of the effects of atomoxetine and stimulants on emotional expression using a newly developed scale for assessing emotional expression in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: The parent-rated Expression and Emotion Scale for Children (EESC) was collected during two studies. During a cross-sectional validation study, the EESC was completed to assess the child\u27s current treatment and retrospectively for previous medication. In a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of atomoxetine, the EESC was collected at baseline and endpoint. RESULTS: In the validation study, no statistically significant differences in EESC scores were found between groups taking atomoxetine (n = 74) and stimulants (n = 105). Patients who switched from a stimulant to atomoxetine (n = 40) had greater improvement in emotional expression than those switched to another stimulant (n = 21) (p = 0.008). In the clinical trial, no difference in rates of worsening of emotional expression were observed (atomoxetine 8.8%, placebo 12.3%; p = 0.440). CONCLUSION: No treatment differences in emotional expression were observed based on current medications. However, stimulant patients needing to switch medications may have greater improvements in emotional expression by switching to atomoxetine

Simultaneous synthesis of treatment effects and mapping to a common scale:an alternative to standardisation

OBJECTIVE: Trials often may report several similar outcomes measured on different test instruments. We explored a method for synthesising treatment effect information both within and between trials and for reporting treatment effects on a common scale as an alternative to standardisation STUDY DESIGN: We applied a procedure that simultaneously estimates a pooled treatment effect and the “mapping” ratios between the treatment effects on test instruments in a connected network. Standardised and non-standardised treatment effects were compared. The methods were illustrated in a dataset of 22 trials of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors against placebo for social anxiety disorder, each reporting treatment effects on between one and six of a total nine test instruments. RESULTS: Ratios of treatment effects on different test instruments varied from trial to trial, with a coefficient of variation of 18% (95% credible interval 11–29%). Standardised effect models fitted the data less well, and standardised treatment effects were estimated with less relative precision than non-standardised effects and with greater relative heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous synthesis of treatment effects and mapping to a common scale make fewer assumptions than standardising by dividing effects by the sample standard deviation, allow results to be reported on a common scale, and deliver estimates with superior relative precision. © 2015 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

The role of interpersonal style in aggression and its containment in a forensic mental health setting:A correlational and pseudoprospective study of patients and nursing staff

Inpatient aggression on mental health wards is common and staff-patient interactions are frequently reported antecedents to aggression. However, relatively little is known about the precise relationship between aggression and these interactions, or their relationships with aggression and staff containment responses such as restraint and seclusion. This study aimed to determine the roles of anger and interpersonal style among mental health nurses and between nurses and patients in the occurrence of aggression and its containment. A correlational, pseudo-prospective study design was employed. n=85 inpatients and n=65 nurses were recruited from adult, low- and medium- secure wards of a secure forensic mental health service. Participants completed validated self-report anger and transactional interpersonal style measures. Inpatient aggression and containment incident data for a 3-month follow-up period were extracted from clinical records. Dyadic nurse-patient relationships were anti-complementary. Patients’ self-reported anger and staff-rated hostile interpersonal style were significantly positively correlated; staff self-reported anger and patient-rated dominant interpersonal style were also positively correlated. Patient anger predicted aggression and their interpersonal style predicted being subject to containment in the form of restraint and seclusion. There were no statistically significant differences identified on measures between staff who were and were not involved in containment. More targeted intervention for patients’ anger may have a positive impact on interpersonal style and lead to the reduction of incidents. Staff education and skills training programmes should emphasise the importance of interpersonal styles which could help to promote and enhance positive interaction

Incremental Validity of Patients’ Self-Reported Anger Beyond Structured Professional Judgment Tools in the Prediction of Inpatient Aggression

Mental health inpatients’ self-reported violence risk predicts actual aggressive outcomes. Anger, for which there are well-evidenced interventions, commonly precedes inpatient aggression. We aimed to determine whether patients’ self-reported anger added incremental validity to violence prediction beyond routinely completed violence risk assessments. A correlational, pseudo-prospective study design was employed. N = 76 inpatients in secure hospitals completed self-report validated anger measures; routinely collected clinicians' ratings on structured professional judgment tools, and aggressive incident data for a 3-month follow-up period were extracted from clinical records. Thirty four (45%) participants were violent; self-reported anger and clinician-risk ratings were significantly positively correlated. Self-reported anger predicted aggressive outcomes but not incrementally beyond relevant risk assessment subscale and item scores. It may not be beneficial for all patients to self-report anger as part of continuous violence risk assessments, but those who score highly on anger-relevant items of risk assessment tools could be considered for further assessment to support risk-management interventions

Determinants of per diem Hospital Costs in Mental Health

INTRODUCTION:An understanding of differences in hospital costs between patient groups is relevant for the efficient organisation of inpatient care. The main aim of this study was to confirm the hypothesis that eight a priori identified cost drivers influence per diem hospital costs. A second aim was to explore further variables that might influence hospital costs. METHODS:The study included 667 inpatient episodes consecutively discharged in 2014 at the psychiatric hospital of the Medical Centre-University of Freiburg. Fifty-one patient characteristics were analysed. Per diem costs were calculated from the hospital perspective based on a detailed documentation of resource use. Mixed-effects maximum likelihood regression and an ensemble of conditional inference trees were used to analyse data. RESULTS:The study confirmed the a priori hypothesis that not being of middle age (33-64 years), danger to self, involuntary admission, problems in the activities of daily living, the presence of delusional symptoms, the presence of affective symptoms, short length of stay and the discharging ward affect per diem hospital costs. A patient classification system for prospective per diem payment was suggested with the highest per diem hospital costs in episodes having both delusional symptoms and involuntary admissions and the lowest hospital costs in episodes having neither delusional symptoms nor somatic comorbidities. CONCLUSION:Although reliable cost drivers were identified, idiosyncrasies of mental health care complicated the identification of clear and consistent differences in hospital costs between patient groups. Further research could greatly inform current discussions about inpatient mental health reimbursement, in particular with multicentre studies that might find algorithms to split patients in more resource-homogeneous groups

The clinical global impression scale and the influence of patient or staff perspective on outcome

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Since its first publication, the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) has become one of the most widely used assessment instruments in psychiatry. Although some conflicting data has been presented, studies investigating the CGI's validity have only rarely been conducted so far. It is unclear whether the improvement index CGI-I or a difference score of the severity index CGI-S_difis more valid in depicting clinical change. The current study examined the validity of these two measures and investigated whether therapists' CGI ratings correspond to the view the patients themselves have on their condition.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Thirty-one inpatients of a German psychotherapeutic hospital suffering from a major depressive disorder (age M = 45.3, SD = 17.2; 58.1% women) participated. Patients filled in the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). CGI-S and CGI-I were rated from three perspectives: the treating therapist (THER), the team of therapists involved in the patient's treatment (TEAM), and the patient (PAT). BDI and CGI-S were filled in at admission and discharge, CGI-I at discharge only. Data was analysed using effect sizes, Spearman's <it>ρ </it>and intra-class correlations (ICC).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Effect sizes between CGI-I and CGI-S _difratings were large for all three perspectives with substantially higher change scores on CGI-I than on CGI-S _dif. BDI_difcorrelated moderately with PAT ratings, but did not correlate significantly with TEAM or THER ratings. Congruence between CGI-ratings from the three perspectives was low for CGI-S _dif(ICC = .37; Confidence Interval [CI] .15 to .59; <it>F</it>_30,60= 2.77, <it>p </it>< .001; mean <it>ρ </it>= 0.36) and moderate for CGI-I (ICC = .65 (CI .47 to .80; <it>F</it>_30,60= 6.61, <it>p </it>< .001; mean <it>ρ </it>= 0.59).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Results do not suggest a definite recommendation for whether CGI-I or CGI-S _difshould be used since no strong evidence for the validity of neither of them could be found. As congruence between CGI ratings from patients' and staff's perspective was not convincing it cannot be assumed that CGI THER or TEAM ratings fully represent the view of the patient on the severity of his impairment. Thus, we advocate for the incorporation of multiple self- and clinician-reported scales into the design of clinical trials in addition to CGI in order to gain further insight into CGI's relation to the patients' perspective.</p

A study of sertraline in dialysis (ASSertID) : a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of drug treatment for depression in patients undergoing haemodialysis

© 2015 Friedli et al. Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise statedBACKGROUND: The prevalence of depression in people receiving haemodialysis is high with estimates varying between 20 and 40 %. There is little research on the effectiveness of antidepressants in dialysis patients with the few clinical trials suffering significant methodological issues. We plan to carry out a study to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial in patients on haemodialysis who have diagnosed Major Depressive Disorder.METHODS/DESIGN: The study has two phases, a screening phase and the randomised controlled trial. Patients will be screened initially with the Beck Depression Inventory to estimate the number of patients who score 16 or above. These patients will be invited to an interview with a psychiatrist who will invite those with a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder to take part in the trial. Consenting patients will be randomised to either Sertraline or placebo. Patients will be followed-up for 6 months. Demographic and clinical data will be collected at screening interview, baseline interview and 2 weeks, and every month (up to 6 months) after baseline. The primary outcome is to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomised, double blind, placebo pilot trial in haemodialysis patients with depression. Secondary outcomes include estimation of the variability in the outcome measures for the treatment and placebo arms, which will allow for a future adequately powered definitive trial. Analysis will primarily be descriptive, including the number of patients eligible for the trial, drug exposure of Sertraline in haemodialysis patients and the patient experience of participating in this trial.DISCUSSION: There is an urgent need for this research in the dialysis population because of the dearth of good quality and adequately powered studies. Research with renal patients is particularly difficult as they often have complex medical needs. This research will therefore not only assess the outcome of anti-depressants in haemodialysis patients with depression but also the process of running a randomised controlled trial in this population. Hence, the outputs of this feasibility study will be used to inform the design and methodology of a definitive study, adequately powered to determine the efficacy of anti-depressants in patient on haemodialysis with depression.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN06146268 and EudraCT reference: 2012-000547-27.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio