The enduring effect of early life adversities on health trajectories

From PubMed via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2021-07-06, accepted 2021-07-27Publication status: aheadofprin

Psycholinguistic and socioemotional characteristics of young offenders: Do language abilities and gender matter?

Purpose: Previous research demonstrates an association between Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) and criminal offending. International research also implicates alexithymia as being over-represented in forensic samples. This study provides a comprehensive examination of the psycholinguistic and socioemotional profiles of males and females in the youth justice system, with a focus on first time entrants. In the context of Restorative Justice (RJ) underpinning youth justice disposals, this allows for informed intervention and identifies those who may be compromised in their ability to effectively engage in certain interventions. Methods: Participants (N = 145) from a triage centre and youth offending teams, with a mean age of 15.8, completed a range of standardised psycholinguistic assessments considering nonverbal IQ, expressive and receptive language measures and literacy. Additionally, socioemotional measures completed included The Alexithymia Scale and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Results: DLD was present in 87 participants. Except for the emotional score, no statistically significant gender differences were found. The mean language scores for the DLD group were more than 2.25 standard deviations below the normative mean and they demonstrated greater literacy difficulties. A high proportion of the group met the criteria for alexithymia/possible alexithymia (60%), and this was not associated with DLD. Conclusions: High prevalence values for DLD and socioemotional difficulties, not generally gender specific, were found. These difficulties have the possibility to compromise a young person’s ability to engage in rehabilitative strategies. Language assessment and identification of difficulties, especially DLD, upon entry to the youth justice service would assist when planning interventions

A Systematic Review of Interpersonal Violence Perpetration and Victimization Risk Examined Within Single Study Cohorts, Including in Relation to Mental Illness

Rates of both violent victimization and violence perpetration are known to be elevated among individuals with mental illness compared with those in the general population, though the relative risk of each outcome is less well established. In this systematic review, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Criminal Justice Abstracts were searched for articles published any time before October 2021 that reported the prevalence or incidence of both violent victimization and perpetration. We performed two searches to identify studies using samples or cohorts of (1) persons with mental illnesses and (2) persons in the general population. A total of 25 studies (9 examining persons with mental illnesses, 13 examining persons in the general population, and 3 examining both sample/cohort types) were identified and data was extracted to describe the type and size of cohort or sample, definitions and terminology (i.e., mental illness, violence victimization, violence perpetration), data source(s), observation period, prevalence/incidence of victimization, and prevalence/incidence of perpetration. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data was used to conduct a quality assessment of all included studies. Due to marked study heterogeneity, results were presented using a narrative synthesis approach. Across studies, findings were mixed, and the methodological approaches varied greatly. Broadly, the review provides evidence for (1) higher rates of victimization than perpetration for both individuals with mental illness and those in the general population and (2) higher rates of both victimization and perpetration for those with mental illness compared to those in the general population

Non-psychotropic medication and risk of suicide or attempted suicide: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To establish which non-psychotropic medications have been assessed in relation to risk of suicide or attempted suicide in observational studies, document reported associations and consider study strengths and limitations. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: Four databases (Embase, Medline, PsycINFO and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts) were searched from 1990 to June 2014, and reference lists of included articles were hand-searched. Case–control, cohort and case only studies which reported suicide or attempted suicide in association with any non-psychotropic medication were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcomes eligible for inclusion were suicide and attempted suicide, as defined by the authors of the included study. RESULTS: Of 11 792 retrieved articles, 19 were eligible for inclusion. Five studies considered cardiovascular medication and antiepileptics; two considered leukotriene receptor antagonists, isotretinoin and corticosteroids; one assessed antibiotics and another assessed varenicline. An additional study compared multiple medications prescribed to suicide cases versus controls. There was marked heterogeneity in study design, outcome and exposure classification, and control for confounding factors; particularly comorbid mental and physical illness. No increased risk was associated with cardiovascular medications, but associations with other medications remained inconclusive and meta-analysis was inappropriate due to study heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Whether non-psychotropic medications are associated with increased risk of suicide or attempted suicide remains largely unknown. Robust identification of suicide outcomes and control of comorbidities could improve quantification of risk associated with non-psychotropic medication, beyond that conferred by underlying physical and mental illnesses

Self-harm risk between adolescence and midlife in people who experienced separation from one or both parents during childhood

AbstractBackgroundExperience of child-parent separation predicts adverse outcomes in later life. We conducted a detailed epidemiological examination of this complex relationship by modelling an array of separation scenarios and trajectories and subsequent risk of self-harm.MethodsThis cohort study examined persons born in Denmark during 1971–1997. We measured child-parent separations each year from birth to 15th birthday via complete residential address records in the Civil Registration System. Self-harm episodes between 15th birthday and early middle age were ascertained through linkage to psychiatric and general hospital registers. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) from Poisson regression models were estimated against a reference category of individuals not separated from their parents.ResultsAll exposure models examined indicated an association with raised self-harm risk. For example, large elevations in risk were observed in relation to separation from both parents at 15th birthday (IRR 5.50, 95% CI 5.25–5.77), experiencing five or more changes in child-parent separation status (IRR 5.24, CI 4.88–5.63), and having a shorter duration of familial cohesion during upbringing. There was no significant evidence for varying strength of association according to child's gender.LimitationsMeasuring child-parent separation according to differential residential addresses took no account of the reason for or circumstances of these separations.ConclusionsThese novel findings suggest that self-harm prevention initiatives should be tailored toward exposed persons who remain psychologically distressed into adulthood. These high-risk subgroups include individuals with little experience of familial cohesion during their upbringing, those with the most complicated trajectories who lived through multiple child-parent separation transitions, and those separated from both parents during early adolescence

Antipsychotic prescribing to patients diagnosed with dementia without a diagnosis of psychosis in the context of national guidance and drug safety warnings: longitudinal study in UK general practice

Introduction: Policy interventions to address inappropriate prescribing of antipsychotic drugs to older people diagnosed with dementia are commonplace. In the UK, warnings were issued by the Medicines Healthcare products Regulatory Agency in 2004, 2009 and 2012 and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance was published in 2006. It is important to evaluate the impact of such interventions. Methods: We analysed routinely collected primary-care data from 111,346 patients attending one of 689 general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink to describe the temporal changes in the prescribing of antipsychotic drugs to patients aged 65 years or over diagnosed with dementia without a concomitant psychosis diagnosis from 2001 to 2014 using an interrupted time series and a before-and-after design. Logistic regression methods were used to quantify the impact of patient and practice level variables on prescribing prevalence. Results: Prescribing of first-generation antipsychotic drugs reduced from 8.9% in 2001 to 1.4% in 2014 (prevalence ratio 2014/2001 adjusted for age, sex and clustering within practices (0.14, 95% confidence interval 0.12–0.16), whereas there was little change for second-generation antipsychotic drugs (1.01, confidence interval 0.94–1.17). Between 2004 and 2012, several policy interventions coincided with a pattern of ups and downs, whereas the 2006 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance was followed by a gradual longer term reduction. Since 2013, the decreasing trend in second-generation antipsychotic drug prescribing has plateaued largely driven by the increasing prescribing of risperidone. Conclusions: Increased surveillance and evaluation of drug safety warnings and guidance are needed to improve the impact of future interventions

'Relieved to be seen'-patient and carer experiences of psychosocial assessment in the emergency department following self-harm: qualitative analysis of 102 free-text survey responses.

From Europe PMC via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: ppub 2021-05-01, epub 2021-05-23Publication status: PublishedObjectivesWe sought to explore patient and carer experiences of psychosocial assessments following presentations to hospital after self-harm.DesignThematic analysis of free-text responses to an open-ended online survey.SettingBetween March and November 2019, we recruited 88 patients (82% women) and 14 carers aged ≥18 years from 16 English mental health trusts, community organisations, and via social media.ResultsPsychosocial assessments were experienced as helpful on some occasions but harmful on others. Participants felt better, less suicidal and less likely to repeat self-harm after good-quality compassionate and supportive assessments. However, negative experiences during the assessment pathway were common and, in some cases, contributed to greater distress, less engagement and further self-harm. Participants reported receiving negative and stigmatising comments about their injuries. Others reported that they were refused medical care or an anaesthetic. Stigmatising attitudes among some mental health staff centred on preconceived ideas over self-harm as a 'behavioural issue', inappropriate use of services and psychiatric diagnosis.ConclusionOur findings highlight important patient experiences that can inform service provision and they demonstrate the value of involving patients/carers throughout the research process. Psychosocial assessments can be beneficial when empathetic and collaborative but less helpful when overly standardised, lacking in compassion and waiting times are unduly long. Patient views are essential to inform practice, particularly given the rapidly changing service context during and after the COVID-19 emergency

Does clinical management improve outcomes following self-Harm? Results from the multicentre study of self-harm in England

Background Evidence to guide clinical management of self-harm is sparse, trials have recruited selected samples, and psychological treatments that are suggested in guidelines may not be available in routine practice. Aims To examine how the management that patients receive in hospital relates to subsequent outcome. Methods We identified episodes of self-harm presenting to three UK centres (Derby, Manchester, Oxford) over a 10 year period (2000 to 2009). We used established data collection systems to investigate the relationship between four aspects of management (psychosocial assessment, medical admission, psychiatric admission, referral for specialist mental health follow up) and repetition of self-harm within 12 months, adjusted for differences in baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Results 35,938 individuals presented with self-harm during the study period. In two of the three centres, receiving a psychosocial assessment was associated with a 40% lower risk of repetition, Hazard Ratios (95% CIs): Centre A 0.99 (0.90–1.09); Centre B 0.59 (0.48–0.74); Centre C 0.59 (0.52–0.68). There was little indication that the apparent protective effects were mediated through referral and follow up arrangements. The association between psychosocial assessment and a reduced risk of repetition appeared to be least evident in those from the most deprived areas. Conclusion These findings add to the growing body of evidence that thorough assessment is central to the management of self-harm, but further work is needed to elucidate the possible mechanisms and explore the effects in different clinical subgroups

Liaison psychiatry practitioners' views on accessing aftercare and psychological therapies for patients who present to hospital following self-harm: multi-site interview study

Background Timely provision of aftercare following self-harm may reduce risks of repetition and premature death, but existing services are frequently reported as being inadequate. Aims To explore barriers and facilitators to accessing aftercare and psychological therapies for patients presenting to hospital following self-harm, from the perspective of liaison psychiatry practitioners. Method Between March 2019 and December 2020, we interviewed 51 staff members across 32 liaison psychiatry services in England. We used thematic analyses to interpret the interview data. Results Barriers to accessing services may heighten risk of further self-harm for patients and burnout for staff. Barriers included: perceived risk, exclusionary thresholds, long waiting times, siloed working and bureaucracy. Strategies to increase access to aftercare included: (a) improving assessments and care plans via input from skilled staff working in multidisciplinary teams (e.g. including social workers and clinical psychologists); (b) supporting staff to focus on assessments as therapeutic intervention; (c) probing boundaries and involving senior staff to negotiate risk and advocate for patients; and (d) building relationships and integration across services. Conclusions Our findings highlight practitioners' views on barriers to accessing aftercare and strategies to circumvent some of these impediments. Provision of aftercare and psychological therapies as part of the liaison psychiatry service were deemed as an essential mechanism for optimising patient safety and experience and staff well-being. To close treatment gaps and reduce inequalities, it is important to work closely with staff and patients, learn from experiences of good practice and implement change more widely across services