Investigating geographical variation in the use of mental health services by area of England: a cross-sectional ecological study

BACKGROUND: There is evidence of geographical variation in the use of mental health services in the UK and in international settings. It is important to understand whether this variation reflects differences in the prevalence of mental disorders, or if there is evidence of variation related to other factors, such as population socioeconomic status and access to primary care services. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional ecological study using Public Health England data. The unit of analysis was the population served by clinical commissioning groups (CCGs), National Health Service (NHS) catchment areas. The analysis explored associations between area characteristics and the number of people in contact with mental health services using regression modelling. Explanatory variables included age, gender, prevalence of severe mental illness (SMI), prevalence of common mental disorder (CMD), index of multiple deprivation (IMD), unemployment, proportion of the population who are Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME), population density, access to and recovery in primary care psychological therapies. Unadjusted results are reported, as well as estimates adjusted for age, prevalence of CMD and prevalence of SMI. RESULTS: The populations of 194 CCGs were included, clustered within 62 trusts (NHS providers of mental health services). The number of people in contact with mental health services showed wide variation by area (range from 1131 to 5205 per 100,000 population). Unemployment (adjusted IRR 1.11; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.17; p < 0.001) and deprivation (adjusted IRR 1.02 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04; p < 0.001) were associated with more people being in contact with mental health services. Areas with a higher proportion of the population who are BAME (IRR 0.95 95% CI 0.92 to 0.99 p = 0.007) had lower service use per 100,000 population. There was no evidence for association with access to primary care psychological therapies. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation in the use of mental health services by area of England. Social factors including deprivation, unemployment and population ethnicity continued to be associated with the outcome after controlling for the prevalence of mental illness. This suggests that there are factors that influence the local population use of mental health services in addition to the prevalence of mental disorder

Prevalence and characteristics of antidepressant prescribing in adults with comorbid depression and type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Treatment guidelines do not provide specific recommendations for antidepressant prescribing in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). It is important to understand the prevalence of antidepressant prescribing and associated patient characteristics, to recognise safety issues or inequalities related to treatment access. Methods and Results: Seven databases were searched using terms related to depression, T2DM and antidepressant medication. From 14,389 reports retrieved, 9 met inclusion criteria. The prevalence of antidepressant prescribing varied considerably between studies from 18% to 87%. Where meta-analyses were possible, the pooled odds ratio for receiving an antidepressant were 1.52 (95% confidence intervals (CIs) 1.28 - 1.82) in women compared to men, 0.53 (95% CIs 0.23-1.20%) in Black and Ethnic Minorities compared to White ethnicity and 1.29 (95% CIs 0.92-1.80) in insulin users compared to individuals with non-insulin controlled T2DM. Conclusions: Antidepressant prescribing is more common in women with T2DM compared to men, however, the difference is less than in the general population. Insulin users, representing individuals with more advanced T2DM, were as likely to be prescribed antidepressants as those who did not use insulin. There is a gap in the literature concerning which antidepressant agents are being prescribed, and alongside which concurrent medications and comorbidities

Experiences of crisis care among service users with complex emotional needs or a diagnosis of 'personality disorder', and other stakeholders: systematic review and meta-synthesis of the qualitative literature

BACKGROUND: Mental health crises are common in people with complex emotional needs (our preferred working term for people diagnosed with a 'personality disorder'), yet this population is often dissatisfied with the crisis care they receive. Exploring their experiences and views on what could be improved, and those of carers and healthcare staff, is key to developing better services. AIMS: We aimed to synthesise the relevant qualitative literature. METHOD: Five databases were searched. Eligible studies included service users with a diagnosis of personality disorder and their carers or relevant staff, focused on crisis responses and used a qualitative design. Data were analysed with thematic synthesis. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included, most focusing on emergency departments. Four meta-themes emerged: (a) acceptance and rejection when presenting to crisis care: limited options and lack of involvement of carers; (b) interpersonal processes: importance of the therapeutic relationship and establishing a framework for treatment; (c) managing recovery from a crisis: clear recovery plan and negotiating collaboration; and (d) equipping and supporting staff: training and emotional support. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that emergency departments have major limitations as settings to provide crisis care for people with complex emotional needs, but there is a lack of research exploring alternatives. The quality of the therapeutic relationship was central to how care was experienced, with collaborative and optimistic staff highly valued. Staff reported feeling poorly supported in responding to the needs of this population. Research looking at experiences of a range of care options and how to improve these is needed

Crisis and acute mental health care for people who have been given a diagnosis of a 'personality disorder': a systematic review

BACKGROUND: People who have been given a diagnosis of a 'personality disorder' need access to good quality mental healthcare when in crisis, but the evidence underpinning crisis services for this group is limited. We synthesised quantitative studies reporting outcomes for people with a 'personality disorder' diagnosis using crisis and acute mental health services. METHODS: We searched OVID Medline, PsycInfo, PsycExtra, Web of Science, HMIC, CINAHL Plus, Clinical Trials and Cochrane CENTRAL for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that reported at least one clinical or social outcome following use of crisis and acute care for people given a 'personality disorder' diagnosis. We performed a narrative synthesis of evidence for each model of care found. RESULTS: We screened 16,953 records resulting in 35 studies included in the review. Studies were published between 1987-2022 and conducted in 13 countries. Six studies were RCTs, the remainder were non randomised controlled studies or cohort studies reporting change over time. Studies were found reporting outcomes for crisis teams, acute hospital admission, acute day units, brief admission, crisis-focused psychotherapies in a number of settings, Mother and Baby units, an early intervention service and joint crisis planning. The evidence for all models of care except brief admission and outpatient-based psychotherapies was assessed as low or very low certainty. CONCLUSION: The literature found was sparse and of low quality. There were no high-quality studies that investigated outcomes following use of crisis team or hospital admission for this group. Studies investigating crisis-focused psychological interventions showed potentially promising results

Acute mental health presentations before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: A number of community based surveys have identified an increase in psychological symptoms and distress but there has been no examination of symptoms at the more severe end of the mental health spectrum. // Aims: We aimed to analyse numbers and types of psychiatric presentations to inform planning for future demand on mental health services in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. // Method: We analysed electronic data between January and April 2020 for 2534 patients referred to acute psychiatric services, and tested for differences in patient demographics, symptom severity and use of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA), before and after lockdown. We used interrupted time-series analyses to compare trends in emergency department and psychiatric presentations until December 2020. // Results: There were 22% fewer psychiatric presentations the first week and 48% fewer emergency department presentations in the first month after lockdown initiated. A higher proportion of patients were detained under the MHA (22.2 v. 16.1%) and Mental Capacity Act 2005 (2.2 v. 1.1%) (χ2(2) = 16.3, P < 0.0001), and they experienced a longer duration of symptoms before seeking help from mental health services (χ2(3) = 18.6, P < 0.0001). A higher proportion of patients presented with psychotic symptoms (23.3 v. 17.0%) or delirium (7.0 v. 3.6%), and fewer had self-harm behaviour (43.8 v. 52.0%, χ2(7) = 28.7, P < 0.0001). A higher proportion were admitted to psychiatric in-patient units (22.2 v. 18.3%) (χ2(6) = 42.8, P < 0.0001) after lockdown. // Conclusions: UK lockdown resulted in fewer psychiatric presentations, but those who presented were more likely to have severe symptoms, be detained under the MHA and be admitted to hospital. Psychiatric services should ensure provision of care for these patients as well as planning for those affected by future COVID-19 waves