Better together?: a naturalistic qualitative study of inter-professional working in collaborative care for co-morbid depression and physical health problems

Background Mental-physical multi-morbidities pose challenges for primary care services that traditionally focus on single diseases. Collaborative care models encourage inter-professional working to deliver better care for patients with multiple chronic conditions, such as depression and long-term physical health problems. Successive trials from the United States have shown that collaborative care effectively improves depression outcomes, even in people with long-term conditions (LTCs), but little is known about how to implement collaborative care in the United Kingdom. The aim of the study was to explore the extent to which collaborative care was implemented in a naturalistic National Health Service setting. Methods A naturalistic pilot study of collaborative care was undertaken in North West England. Primary care mental health professionals from IAPT (Increasing Access to Psychological Therapies) services and general practice nurses were trained to collaboratively identify and manage patients with co-morbid depression and long-term conditions. Qualitative interviews were performed with health professionals at the beginning and end of the pilot phase. Normalization Process Theory guided analysis. Results Health professionals adopted limited elements of the collaborative care model in practice. Although benefits of co-location in primary care practices were reported, including reduced stigma of accessing mental health treatment and greater ease of disposal for identified patients, existing norms around the division of mental and physical health work in primary care were maintained, limiting integration of the mental health practitioners into the practice setting. Neither the mental health practitioners nor the practice nurses perceived benefits to joint management of patients. Conclusions Established divisions between mental and physical health may pose particular challenges for multi-morbidity service delivery models such as collaborative care. Future work should explore patient perspectives about whether greater inter-professional working enhances experiences of care. The study demonstrates that research into implementation of novel treatments must consider how the introduction of innovation can be balanced with the need for integration into existing practice

HIV/AIDS and home-based health care

This paper highlights the socio-economic impacts of HIV/AIDS on women. It argues that the socio-cultural beliefs that value the male and female lives differently lead to differential access to health care services. The position of women is exacerbated by their low financial base especially in the rural community where their main source of livelihood, agricultural production does not pay much. But even their active involvement in agricultural production or any other income ventures is hindered when they have to give care to the sick and bedridden friends and relatives. This in itself is a threat to household food security. The paper proposes that gender sensitive policies and programming of intervention at community level would lessen the burden on women who bear the brunt of AIDS as caregivers and livelihood generators at household level. Improvement of medical facilities and quality of services at local dispensaries is seen as feasible since they are in the rural areas. Other interventions should target freeing women's and girls' time for education and involvement in income generating ventures. Two separate data sets from Western Kenya, one being quantitative and another qualitative data have been used

A five-year review of burn injuries in Irrua

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The management of burns remains a challenge in developing countries. Few data exist to document the extent of the problem. This study provides data from a suburban setting by documenting the epidemiology of burn injury and ascertaining outcome of management. This will help in planning strategies for prevention of burns and reducing severity of complications.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A total of 72 patients admitted for burns between January 1st, 2002 and December 31st, 2006 at the Irrua specialist teaching hospital were studied retrospectively. Sources of information were the case notes and operation registers. Data extracted included demographics as well as treatment methods and outcome</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results revealed male to female ratio of 2.1:1. Over 50% of the injuries occurred at home. There was a seasonal variation with over 40% of injuries occurring between November and January. The commonest etiologic agent was flame burn from kerosene explosion. There were 7 deaths in the series.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Burns are preventable. We recommend adequate supply of unadulterated petroleum products and establishment of burn centers.</p

CERT1 mutations perturb human development by disrupting sphingolipid homeostasis

Neural differentiation, synaptic transmission, and action potential propagation depend on membrane sphingolipids, whose metabolism is tightly regulated. Mutations in the ceramide transporter CERT (CERT1), which is involved in sphingolipid biosynthesis, are associated with intellectual disability, but the pathogenic mechanism remains obscure. Here, we characterize 31 individuals with de novo missense variants in CERT1. Several variants fall into a previously uncharacterized dimeric helical domain that enables CERT homeostatic inactivation, without which sphingolipid production goes unchecked. The clinical severity reflects the degree to which CERT autoregulation is disrupted, and inhibiting CERT pharmacologically corrects morphological and motor abnormalities in a Drosophila model of the disease, which we call ceramide transporter (CerTra) syndrome. These findings uncover a central role for CERT autoregulation in the control of sphingolipid biosynthetic flux, provide unexpected insight into the structural organization of CERT, and suggest a possible therapeutic approach for patients with CerTra syndrome.This work was supported by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), NIH (R01NS109858, to VAG); the Paul A. Marks Scholar Program at the Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons (to VAG); a TIGER grant from the TAUB Institute at the Columbia Vagelos College of Physicians and Scientists (to VAG); the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF 31003A-179371, to TH); the European Joint Program on Rare Diseases (EJP RD+SNF 32ER30-187505, to TH); the Swiss Cancer League (KFS-4999-02-2020, to GD); the EPFL institutional fund (to GD); the Kristian Gerhard Jebsen Foundation (to GD); the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) (310030_184926, to GD); the Swiss Foundation for Research on Muscle Disease (FSRMM, to MAL); the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Discovery Grant 2020-04241, to JEB); the Italian Ministry of Health Young Investigator Grant (GR-2011-02347754, to EL); the Fondazione Istituto di Ricerca Pediatrica – Città della Speranza (18-04, to EL); the Wroclaw Medical University (SUB.E160.21.004, to RS); the National Science Centre, Poland (2017/27/B/NZ5/0222, to RS); Telethon Undiagnosed Diseases Program (TUDP) (GSP15001); the Temple Street Foundation/Children’s Health Foundation Ireland (RPAC 19-02, to IK); the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (PO2366/2–1, to BP); the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain (to ELM, EBS, and BMD); the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81871079 and 81730036, to HG and KX); and the National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), NIH (R01 DK115574, to SSC).The DEFIDIAG study is funded by grants from the French Ministry of Health in the framewok of the national French initiative for genomic medicine. The funders were not involved in the study design, data acquisition, analysis, or writing of the manuscript. Funding for the DECIPHER project was provided by Wellcome. The DDD study presents independent research commissioned by the Health Innovation Challenge Fund (grant number HICF-1009-003), a parallel funding partnership between Wellcome and the Department of Health, and the Wellcome Sanger Institute (grant number WT098051). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of Wellcome or the Department of Health. The study has UK Research Ethics Committee approval (10/H0305/83, granted by the Cambridge South REC, and GEN/284/12, granted by the Republic of Ireland REC). The research team acknowledges the support of the National Institute for Health Research, through the Comprehensive Clinical Research Network.S

MindKind: A mixed-methods protocol for the feasibility of global digital mental health studies in young people

While an estimated 14-20% of young adults experience mental health conditions worldwide, the best strategies for prevention and management are not fully understood. The ubiquity of smartphone use among young people makes them excellent candidates for collecting data about lived experiences and their relationships to mental health. However, not much is known about the factors affecting young peoples’ willingness to share information about their mental health. OBJECTIVE: We aim to understand the data governance and engagement strategies influencing young peoples’ (aged 16-24) participation in app-based studies of mental health. We hypothesize that willingness to participate in research is influenced by involvement  in how their data is collected, shared, and used. METHODS: Here, we describe the MindKind Study, which employs mixed methods to understand the feasibility of global, smartphone-based studies of youth mental health. A pilot 12-week app-based substudy will query participants’ willingness to engage with remote mental health studies. Participants will be randomized into one of four different data governance models designed to understand their preferences, as well as the acceptability of models that allow them more or less control over how their data are accessed and used. Enrolees will receive one of two different engagement strategies. A companion qualitative study will employ a deliberative democracy approach to examine the preferences, concerns and expectations of young people, with respect to remote mental health research. We also detail our engagement with young people as co-researchers in this study. This pilot study is being conducted in India, South Africa and the United Kingdom. CONCLUSION: This study is expected to generate new insights into the feasibility of, and best practices for, remote smartphone-based studies of mental health in youth and represents an important step toward understanding which approaches could help people better manage their mental health

Managing depression in people with multimorbidity: qualitative evaluation of an integrated collaborative care model

BACKGROUND: Patients with comorbid depression and physical health problems have poorer outcomes compared with those with single long term conditions (LTCs), or multiple LTCs without depression. Primary care has traditionally struggled to provide integrated care for this group. Collaborative care can reduce depression in people with LTCs but evidence is largely based on trials conducted in the United States that adopted separate treat to target protocols for physical and mental health. Little is known about whether collaborative care that integrates depression care within the management of LTCs is implementable in UK primary care, and acceptable to patients and health care professionals. METHODS: Nested interview study within the COINCIDE trial of collaborative care for patients with depression and diabetes/CHD (ISRCTN80309252). The study was conducted in primary care practices in North West England. Professionals delivering the interventions (nurses, GPs and psychological well-being practitioners) and patients in the intervention arm were invited to participate in semi-structured qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Based on combined thematic analysis of 59 transcripts, we identified two major themes: 1) Integration: patients and professionals valued collaborative ways of working because it enhanced co-ordination of mental and physical health care and provided a sense that patients’ health was being more holistically managed. 2) Division: patients and professionals articulated a preference for therapeutic and spatial separation between mental and physical health. Patients especially valued a separate space outside of their LTC clinic to discuss their emotional health problems. CONCLUSION: The COINCIDE care model, that sought to integrate depression care within the context of LTC management, achieved service level integration but not therapeutic integration. Patients preferred a protected space to discuss mental health issues, and professionals maintained barriers around physical and mental health expertise. Findings therefore suggest that in the context of mental-physical multimorbidity, collaborative care can facilitate access to depression care in ways that overcome stigma and enhance the confidence of multidisciplinary health teams to work together. However, such care models need to be flexible and patient centred to accommodate the needs of patients for whom their depression may be independent of their LTC