Facilitation of sexual and gender identity disclosure and improved healthcare for LGBTQ+ patients: current processes, shortcomings, and recommendations for change

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer/questioning (LGBTQ+) people are at increased risk of physical and mental health problems compared to their heterosexual counterparts. There are significant barriers to both accessing and maintaining healthcare for LGBTQ+ people. Disclosure of sexual and gender identity should be facilitated within healthcare services to ensure LGBTQ+ people can receive appropriate healthcare. General practitioners (GPs), being the first point of access to healthcare in the UK, should therefore have knowledge of their patients’ sexual and gender identity. Currently, GPs and other healthcare professionals may not adequately facilitate disclosure of patients’ sexual and gender identity because they believe it is irrelevant or because they feel unequipped. Moreover, heterosexist behaviours from GPs and worries of experiencing discrimination may reduce the likelihood of sexual identity disclosure in patients. This article aims to discuss the current processes and shortcomings within the UK healthcare system to demonstrate that disclosure is not adequately facilitated. Evidence-based recommendations for improved practice are provided, focusing on practitioner training and the primary care environment, whilst building upon the recently launched NHS initiatives such as Pride in Practice. Current efforts to facilitate the needs of LGBTQ+ people must be prioritised and extended in order to end the current healthcare inequalities faced by this community

Current state of the evidence on community treatments for people with complex emotional needs:a scoping review

BACKGROUND: Improving the quality of care in community settings for people with 'Complex Emotional Needs' (CEN-our preferred working term for services for people with a "personality disorder" diagnosis or comparable needs) is recognised internationally as a priority. Plans to improve care should be rooted as far as possible in evidence. We aimed to take stock of the current state of such evidence, and identify significant gaps through a scoping review of published investigations of outcomes of community-based psychosocial interventions designed for CEN. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review with systematic searches. We searched six bibliographic databases, including forward and backward citation searching, and reference searching of relevant systematic reviews. We included studies using quantitative methods to test for effects on any clinical, social, and functioning outcomes from community-based interventions for people with CEN. The final search was conducted in November 2020. RESULTS: We included 226 papers in all (210 studies). Little relevant literature was published before 2000. Since then, publications per year and sample sizes have gradually increased, but most studies are relatively small, including many pilot or uncontrolled studies. Most studies focus on symptom and self-harm outcomes of various forms of specialist psychotherapy: most result in outcomes better than from inactive controls and similar to other specialist psychotherapies. We found large evidence gaps. Adaptation and testing of therapies for significant groups (e.g. people with comorbid psychosis, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, or substance misuse; older and younger groups; parents) have for the most part only reached a feasibility testing stage. We found little evidence regarding interventions to improve social aspects of people's lives, peer support, or ways of designing effective services. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with other longer term mental health problems that significantly impair functioning, the evidence base on how to provide high quality care for people with CEN is very limited. There is good evidence that people with CEN can be helped when specialist therapies are available and when they are able to engage with them. However, a much more methodologically robust and substantial literature addressing a much wider range of research questions is urgently needed to optimise treatment and support across this group

Integrated therapist and online CBT for depression in primary care (INTERACT): study protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for depression. Self-directed online CBT interventions have made CBT more accessible at a lower cost. However, adherence is often poor and, in the absence of therapist support, effects are modest and short-term. Delivering CBT online using instant messaging is clinically and cost-effective; however, most existing platforms are limited to instant messaging sessions, without the support of between-session "homework" activities. The INTERACT intervention integrates online CBT materials and 'high-intensity' therapist-led CBT, delivered remotely in real-time. The INTERACT trial will evaluate this novel integration in terms of clinical and cost-effectiveness, and acceptability to therapists and clients. METHODS: Pragmatic, two parallel-group multi-centre individually randomised controlled trial, with 434 patients recruited from primary care practices in Bristol, London and York. Participants with depression will be identified via General Practitioner record searches and direct referrals. INCLUSION CRITERIA: aged ≥ 18 years; score ≥ 14 on Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II); meeting International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) criteria for depression. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: alcohol or substance dependency in the past year; bipolar disorder; schizophrenia; psychosis; dementia; currently under psychiatric care for depression (including those referred but not yet seen); cannot complete questionnaires unaided or requires an interpreter; currently receiving CBT/other psychotherapy; received high-intensity CBT in the past four years; participating in another intervention trial; unwilling/unable to receive CBT via computer/laptop/smartphone. Eligible participants will be randomised to integrated CBT or usual care. Integrated CBT utilises the standard Beckian intervention for depression and comprises nine live therapist-led sessions, with (up to) a further three if clinically appropriate. The first session is 60-90 min via videocall, with subsequent 50-min sessions delivered online, using instant messaging. Participants allocated integrated CBT can access integrated online CBT resources (worksheets/information sheets/videos) within and between sessions. Outcome assessments at 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-month post-randomisation. The primary outcome is the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) score at 6 months (as a continuous variable). A nested qualitative study and health economic evaluation will be conducted. DISCUSSION: If clinically and cost-effective, this model of integrated CBT could be introduced into existing psychological services, increasing access to, and equity of, CBT provision. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN13112900. Registered on 11/11/2020. Currently recruiting participants. Trial registration data are presented in Table 1

Patient-reported outcome measures for monitoring primary care patients with depression: the PROMDEP cluster RCT and economic evaluation

Background: Guidelines on the management of depression recommend that practitioners use patient-reported outcome measures for the follow-up monitoring of symptoms, but there is a lack of evidence of benefit in terms of patient outcomes.// Objective: To test using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire as a patient-reported outcome measure for monitoring depression, training practitioners in interpreting scores and giving patients feedback.// Design: Parallel-group, cluster-randomised superiority trial; 1 : 1 allocation to intervention and control.// Setting: UK primary care (141 group general practices in England and Wales).// Inclusion criteria: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a new episode of depressive disorder or symptoms, recruited mainly through medical record searches, plus opportunistically in consultations.// Exclusions: Current depression treatment, dementia, psychosis, substance misuse and risk of suicide.// Intervention: Administration of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire with patient feedback soon after diagnosis, and at follow-up 10–35 days later, compared with usual care.// Primary outcome: Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, symptom scores at 12 weeks.// Secondary outcomes: Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, scores at 26 weeks; antidepressant drug treatment and mental health service contacts; social functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale) and quality of life (EuroQol 5-Dimension, five-level) at 12 and 26 weeks; service use over 26 weeks to calculate NHS costs; patient satisfaction at 26 weeks (Medical Informant Satisfaction Scale); and adverse events.// Sample size: The original target sample of 676 patients recruited was reduced to 554 due to finding a significant correlation between baseline and follow-up values for the primary outcome measure.// Randomisation: Remote computerised randomisation with minimisation by recruiting university, small/large practice and urban/rural location.// Blinding: Blinding of participants was impossible given the open cluster design, but self-report outcome measures prevented observer bias. Analysis was blind to allocation.// Analysis: Linear mixed models were used, adjusted for baseline depression, baseline anxiety, sociodemographic factors, and clustering including practice as random effect. Quality of life and costs were analysed over 26 weeks.// Qualitative interviews: Practitioner and patient interviews were conducted to reflect on trial processes and use of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 using the Normalization Process Theory framework.// Results: Three hundred and two patients were recruited in intervention arm practices and 227 patients were recruited in control practices. Primary outcome data were collected for 252 (83.4%) and 195 (85.9%), respectively. No significant difference in Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, score was found at 12 weeks (adjusted mean difference –0.46, 95% confidence interval –2.16 to 1.26). Nor were significant differences found in Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd Edition, score at 26 weeks, social functioning, patient satisfaction or adverse events. EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, quality-of-life scores favoured the intervention arm at 26 weeks (adjusted mean difference 0.053, 95% confidence interval 0.013 to 0.093). However, quality-adjusted life-years over 26 weeks were not significantly greater (difference 0.0013, 95% confidence interval –0.0157 to 0.0182). Costs were lower in the intervention arm but, again, not significantly (–£163, 95% confidence interval –£349 to £28). Cost-effectiveness and cost–utility analyses, therefore, suggested that the intervention was dominant over usual care, but with considerable uncertainty around the point estimates. Patients valued using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 to compare scores at baseline and follow-up, whereas practitioner views were more mixed, with some considering it too time-consuming.// Conclusions: We found no evidence of improved depression management or outcome at 12 weeks from using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, but patients’ quality of life was better at 26 weeks, perhaps because feedback of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores increased their awareness of improvement in their depression and reduced their anxiety. Further research in primary care should evaluate patient-reported outcome measures including anxiety symptoms, administered remotely, with algorithms delivering clear recommendations for changes in treatment

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

‘The phoenix that always rises from the ashes’: an exploratory qualitative study of the experiences of an initiative informed by principles of psychological first aid following the Beirut blast

ABSTRACTBackground: On 4 August 2020, an explosion occurred in Beirut, Lebanon. Hundreds of people were killed, thousands injured and displaced. An initiative was rapidly initiated to provide remote support informed by psychological first aid for the mental health of Lebanese young adults affected by the blast. However, little is known about recipients’ experiences of such initiatives.Objective: This study aimed to qualitatively explore the experiences of supporters and recipients in the community-led initiative following the blast.Method: We recruited a diverse sample of four supporters and four Lebanese recipients who took part in the Beirut initiative. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data.Results: We developed five themes from the qualitative interviews, which highlighted ideas around accessibility, alienation, the relationship, elements of the safe space created by the initiative, and unmet needs and areas for improvement. Recipients described the detrimental impact of the blast on their mental health within the Lebanese context and beyond. Recipients and supporters elucidated complex experiences of the support and its impact.Conclusions: Our findings suggest remote support has the potential to be acceptable for young adults in Lebanon. Further research into support informed by psychological first aid after similar crisis events is warranted

‘The phoenix that always rises from the ashes’: an exploratory qualitative study of the experiences of an initiative informed by principles of psychological first aid following the Beirut blast

Background: On 4 August 2020, an explosion occurred in Beirut, Lebanon. Hundreds of people were killed, thousands injured and displaced. An initiative was rapidly initiated to provide remote support informed by psychological first aid for the mental health of Lebanese young adults affected by the blast. However, little is known about recipients’ experiences of such initiatives. Objective: This study aimed to qualitatively explore the experiences of supporters and recipients in the community-led initiative following the blast. Method: We recruited a diverse sample of four supporters and four Lebanese recipients who took part in the Beirut initiative. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data. Results: We developed five themes from the qualitative interviews, which highlighted ideas around accessibility, alienation, the relationship, elements of the safe space created by the initiative, and unmet needs and areas for improvement. Recipients described the detrimental impact of the blast on their mental health within the Lebanese context and beyond. Recipients and supporters elucidated complex experiences of the support and its impact. Conclusions: Our findings suggest remote support has the potential to be acceptable for young adults in Lebanon. Further research into support informed by psychological first aid after similar crisis events is warranted. Following the Beirut blast on 4 August 2020, an initiative was implemented to provide remote mental health support to Lebanese young adults.Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse qualitative data from interviews with supporters and recipients after support sessions were completed to identify themes across diverse experiences and views.Participants described a feeling of alienation after the blast, the development of a meaningful relationship between supporter and recipients, and gratitude for having a safe space to process and share difficult feelings. Possible avenues for improvement and implementation were suggested. Following the Beirut blast on 4 August 2020, an initiative was implemented to provide remote mental health support to Lebanese young adults. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse qualitative data from interviews with supporters and recipients after support sessions were completed to identify themes across diverse experiences and views. Participants described a feeling of alienation after the blast, the development of a meaningful relationship between supporter and recipients, and gratitude for having a safe space to process and share difficult feelings. Possible avenues for improvement and implementation were suggested.</p

Integrated therapist and online CBT for depression in primary care (INTERACT): study protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial

Abstract Background Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for depression. Self-directed online CBT interventions have made CBT more accessible at a lower cost. However, adherence is often poor and, in the absence of therapist support, effects are modest and short-term. Delivering CBT online using instant messaging is clinically and cost-effective; however, most existing platforms are limited to instant messaging sessions, without the support of between-session “homework” activities. The INTERACT intervention integrates online CBT materials and ‘high-intensity’ therapist-led CBT, delivered remotely in real-time. The INTERACT trial will evaluate this novel integration in terms of clinical and cost-effectiveness, and acceptability to therapists and clients. Methods Pragmatic, two parallel-group multi-centre individually randomised controlled trial, with 434 patients recruited from primary care practices in Bristol, London and York. Participants with depression will be identified via General Practitioner record searches and direct referrals. Inclusion criteria: aged ≥ 18 years; score ≥ 14 on Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II); meeting International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) criteria for depression. Exclusion criteria: alcohol or substance dependency in the past year; bipolar disorder; schizophrenia; psychosis; dementia; currently under psychiatric care for depression (including those referred but not yet seen); cannot complete questionnaires unaided or requires an interpreter; currently receiving CBT/other psychotherapy; received high-intensity CBT in the past four years; participating in another intervention trial; unwilling/unable to receive CBT via computer/laptop/smartphone. Eligible participants will be randomised to integrated CBT or usual care. Integrated CBT utilises the standard Beckian intervention for depression and comprises nine live therapist-led sessions, with (up to) a further three if clinically appropriate. The first session is 60–90 min via videocall, with subsequent 50-min sessions delivered online, using instant messaging. Participants allocated integrated CBT can access integrated online CBT resources (worksheets/information sheets/videos) within and between sessions. Outcome assessments at 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-month post-randomisation. The primary outcome is the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) score at 6 months (as a continuous variable). A nested qualitative study and health economic evaluation will be conducted. Discussion If clinically and cost-effective, this model of integrated CBT could be introduced into existing psychological services, increasing access to, and equity of, CBT provision. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN13112900. Registered on 11/11/2020. Currently recruiting participants. Trial registration data are presented in Table 1

Actionable pharmacogenetic variants in Hong Kong Chinese exome sequencing data and projected prescription impact in the Hong Kong population.

Preemptive pharmacogenetic testing has the potential to improve drug dosing by providing point-of-care patient genotype information. Nonetheless, its implementation in the Chinese population is limited by the lack of population-wide data. In this study, secondary analysis of exome sequencing data was conducted to study pharmacogenomics in 1116 Hong Kong Chinese. We aimed to identify the spectrum of actionable pharmacogenetic variants and rare, predicted deleterious variants that are potentially actionable in Hong Kong Chinese, and to estimate the proportion of dispensed drugs that may potentially benefit from genotype-guided prescription. The projected preemptive pharmacogenetic testing prescription impact was evaluated based on the patient prescription data of the public healthcare system in 2019, serving 7.5 million people. Twenty-nine actionable pharmacogenetic variants/ alleles were identified in our cohort. Nearly all (99.6%) subjects carried at least one actionable pharmacogenetic variant, whereas 93.5% of subjects harbored at least one rare deleterious pharmacogenetic variant. Based on the prescription data in 2019, 13.4% of the Hong Kong population was prescribed with drugs with pharmacogenetic clinical practice guideline recommendations. The total expenditure on actionable drugs was 33,520,000 USD, and it was estimated that 8,219,000 USD (24.5%) worth of drugs were prescribed to patients with an implicated actionable phenotype. Secondary use of exome sequencing data for pharmacogenetic analysis is feasible, and preemptive pharmacogenetic testing has the potential to support prescription decisions in the Hong Kong Chinese population

Patient-reported outcome measures for monitoring primary care patients with depression: the PROMDEP cluster RCT and economic evaluation

Background: guidelines on the management of depression recommend that practitioners use patient-reported outcome measures for the follow-up monitoring of symptoms, but there is a lack of evidence of benefit in terms of patient outcomes.Objective: to test using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire as a patient-reported outcome measure for monitoring depression, training practitioners in interpreting scores and giving patients feedback.Design: parallel-group, cluster-randomised superiority trial; 1 : 1 allocation to intervention and control.Setting: UK primary care (141 group general practices in England and Wales).Inclusion criteria: patients aged ≥ 18 years with a new episode of depressive disorder or symptoms, recruited mainly through medical record searches, plus opportunistically in consultations.Exclusions: current depression treatment, dementia, psychosis, substance misuse and risk of suicide.Intervention: administration of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire with patient feedback soon after diagnosis, and at follow-up 10-35 days later, compared with usual care.Primary outcome: Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, symptom scores at 12 weeks.Secondary outcomes: Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, scores at 26 weeks; antidepressant drug treatment and mental health service contacts; social functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale) and quality of life (EuroQol 5-Dimension, five-level) at 12 and 26 weeks; service use over 26 weeks to calculate NHS costs; patient satisfaction at 26 weeks (Medical Informant Satisfaction Scale); and adverse events.Sample size: the original target sample of 676 patients recruited was reduced to 554 due to finding a significant correlation between baseline and follow-up values for the primary outcome measure.Randomisation: remote computerised randomisation with minimisation by recruiting university, small/large practice and urban/rural location.Blinding: blinding of participants was impossible given the open cluster design, but self-report outcome measures prevented observer bias. Analysis was blind to allocation.Analysis: linear mixed models were used, adjusted for baseline depression, baseline anxiety, sociodemographic factors, and clustering including practice as random effect. Quality of life and costs were analysed over 26 weeks.Qualitative interviews: practitioner and patient interviews were conducted to reflect on trial processes and use of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 using the Normalization Process Theory framework.Results: three hundred and two patients were recruited in intervention arm practices and 227 patients were recruited in control practices. Primary outcome data were collected for 252 (83.4%) and 195 (85.9%), respectively. No significant difference in Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, score was found at 12 weeks (adjusted mean difference -0.46, 95% confidence interval -2.16 to 1.26). Nor were significant differences found in Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd Edition, score at 26 weeks, social functioning, patient satisfaction or adverse events. EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, quality-of-life scores favoured the intervention arm at 26 weeks (adjusted mean difference 0.053, 95% confidence interval 0.013 to 0.093). However, quality-adjusted life-years over 26 weeks were not significantly greater (difference 0.0013, 95% confidence interval -0.0157 to 0.0182). Costs were lower in the intervention arm but, again, not significantly (-£163, 95% confidence interval -£349 to £28). Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, therefore, suggested that the intervention was dominant over usual care, but with considerable uncertainty around the point estimates. Patients valued using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 to compare scores at baseline and follow-up, whereas practitioner views were more mixed, with some considering it too time-consuming.Conlusions: we found no evidence of improved depression management or outcome at 12 weeks from using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, but patients' quality of life was better at 26 weeks, perhaps because feedback of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores increased their awareness of improvement in their depression and reduced their anxiety. Further research in primary care should evaluate patient-reported outcome measures including anxiety symptoms, administered remotely, with algorithms delivering clear recommendations for changes in treatment.Study registration: this study is registered as IRAS250225 and ISRCTN17299295.Funding: this award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/42/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 17. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. </p