Association of cannabis with glutamatergic levels in patients with early psychosis: Evidence for altered volume striatal glutamate relationships in patients with a history of cannabis use in early psychosis

he associative striatum, an established substrate in psychosis, receives widespread glutamatergic projections. We sought to see if glutamatergic indices are altered between early psychosis patients with and without a history of cannabis use and characterise the relationship to grey matter. 92 participants were scanned: Early Psychosis with a history of cannabis use (EPC = 29); Early Psychosis with minimal cannabis use (EPMC = 25); Controls with a history of cannabis use (HCC = 16) and Controls with minimal use (HCMC = 22). Whole brain T1 weighted MR images and localised proton MR spectra were acquired from head of caudate, anterior cingulate and hippocampus. We examined relationships in regions with known high cannabinoid 1 receptor (CB1R) expression (grey matter, cortex, hippocampus, amygdala) and low expression (white matter, ventricles, brainstem) to caudate Glutamine+Glutamate (Glx). Patients were well matched in symptoms, function and medication. There was no significant group difference in Glx in any region. In EPC grey matter volume explained 31.9% of the variance of caudate Glx (p = 0.003) and amygdala volume explained 36.9% (p = 0.001) of caudate Glx. There was no significant relationship in EPMC. The EPC vs EPMC interaction was significant (p = 0.042). There was no such relationship in control regions. These results are the first to demonstrate association of grey matter volume and striatal glutamate in the EPC group. This may suggest a history of cannabis use leads to a conformational change in distal CB1 rich grey matter regions to influence striatal glutamatergic levels or that such connectivity predisposes to heavy cannabis use

Codesigning a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS): a protocol for integrating realist evaluation and an engineering-based systems approach

© 2023 The Author(s). Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Introduction: Transition following discharge from mental health hospital is high risk in terms of relapse, readmission and suicide. Discharge planning supports transition and reduces risk. It is a complex activity involving interacting systemic elements. The codesigning a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS) study aims to improve the process for people being discharged, their carers/supporters and staff who work in mental health services, by understanding, co-designing and evaluating implementation of a systemic approach to discharge planning. Methods and analysis: The MINDS study integrates realist research and an engineering-informed systems approach across three stages. Stage 1 applies realist review and evaluation using a systems approach to develop programme theories of discharge planning. Stage 2 uses an Engineering Better Care framework to codesign a novel systemic discharge intervention, which will be subjected to process and economic evaluation in stage 3. The programme theories and resulting care planning approach will be refined throughout the study ready for a future clinical trial. MINDS is co-led by an expert by experience, with researchers with lived experience co-leading each stage. Ethics and dissemination: MINDS stage 1 has received ethical approval from Yorkshire & The Humber—Bradford Leeds (Research Ethics Committee (22/YH/0122). Findings from MINDS will be disseminated via high-impact journal publications and conference presentations, including those with service user and mental health professional audiences. We will establish routes to engage with public and service user communities and National Health Service professionals including blogs, podcasts and short videos. Trial registration number: MINDS is funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR 133013) https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR133013. The realist review protocol is registered on PROSPERO. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021293255.Peer reviewe

The effectiveness of health behavior change interventions in managing physical health in people with a psychotic illness: A systematic review

PurposePeople living with psychotic illness disproportionately experience more comorbidities and have a markedly shorter life expectancy compared to the general population. This review evaluates the effectiveness of health behavior change interventions in improving health outcomes in this group.Design and MethodsAll studies included objective physical health measures or health behaviors as the main outcome measures and experimental design with baseline and follow‐up quantitative data. Only studies of moderate and strong quality were included. Narrative synthesis was undertaken.FindingsIncluded studies utilized a range of methodological designs and outcome measures. The majority reported significant intervention effect on most outcome measures.Practice ImplicationsHealth behavior change interventions can be effective in improving health outcomes in people with psychotic illness, with the potential benefit of improved psychiatric outcomes

Co-designing a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS): a protocol for integrating realist evaluation and an engineering-based systems approach

Transition following discharge from mental health hospital is high risk in terms of relapse, readmission, and suicide. Discharge planning supports transition and reduces risk. It is a complex activity involving interacting systemic elements. The MINDS study aims to improve the process for people being discharged, their carers/supporters and staff who work in mental health services, by understanding, co-designing and evaluating implementation of a systemic approach to discharge planning.NIHR13301

Codesigning a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS): a protocol for integrating realist evaluation and an engineering-based systems approach

Peer reviewed: TrueAcknowledgements: We would like to thank LEAG members including Hajara Begum, Katie Fillingham, June Hanshaw, John Lucas, Isaac Samuels, and Roger Talbot for their ongoing input across the MINDS project; helping to ensure the processes and outputs reflect the experiences and needs of people with lived experience and their supporters.IntroductionTransition following discharge from mental health hospital is high risk in terms of relapse, readmission and suicide. Discharge planning supports transition and reduces risk. It is a complex activity involving interacting systemic elements. The codesigning a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS) study aims to improve the process for people being discharged, their carers/supporters and staff who work in mental health services, by understanding, co-designing and evaluating implementation of a systemic approach to discharge planning.Methods and analysisThe MINDS study integrates realist research and an engineering-informed systems approach across three stages. Stage 1 applies realist review and evaluation using a systems approach to develop programme theories of discharge planning. Stage 2 uses an Engineering Better Care framework to codesign a novel systemic discharge intervention, which will be subjected to process and economic evaluation in stage 3. The programme theories and resulting care planning approach will be refined throughout the study ready for a future clinical trial. MINDS is co-led by an expert by experience, with researchers with lived experience co-leading each stage.Ethics and disseminationMINDS stage 1 has received ethical approval from Yorkshire &amp; The Humber—Bradford Leeds (Research Ethics Committee (22/YH/0122). Findings from MINDS will be disseminated via high-impact journal publications and conference presentations, including those with service user and mental health professional audiences. We will establish routes to engage with public and service user communities and National Health Service professionals including blogs, podcasts and short videos.Trial registration numberMINDS is funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR 133013)https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR133013. The realist review protocol is registered on PROSPERO.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021293255.</jats:sec

Codesigning a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS): a protocol for integrating realist evaluation and an engineering-based systems approach.

IntroductionTransition following discharge from mental health hospital is high risk in terms of relapse, readmission and suicide. Discharge planning supports transition and reduces risk. It is a complex activity involving interacting systemic elements. The codesigning a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS) study aims to improve the process for people being discharged, their carers/supporters and staff who work in mental health services, by understanding, co-designing and evaluating implementation of a systemic approach to discharge planning.Methods and analysisThe MINDS study integrates realist research and an engineering-informed systems approach across three stages. Stage 1 applies realist review and evaluation using a systems approach to develop programme theories of discharge planning. Stage 2 uses an Engineering Better Care framework to codesign a novel systemic discharge intervention, which will be subjected to process and economic evaluation in stage 3. The programme theories and resulting care planning approach will be refined throughout the study ready for a future clinical trial. MINDS is co-led by an expert by experience, with researchers with lived experience co-leading each stage.Ethics and disseminationMINDS stage 1 has received ethical approval from Yorkshire & The Humber-Bradford Leeds (Research Ethics Committee (22/YH/0122). Findings from MINDS will be disseminated via high-impact journal publications and conference presentations, including those with service user and mental health professional audiences. We will establish routes to engage with public and service user communities and National Health Service professionals including blogs, podcasts and short videos.Trial registration numberMINDS is funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR 133013) https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR133013. The realist review protocol is registered on PROSPERO.Prospero registration numberCRD42021293255

Codesigning a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS): a protocol for integrating realist evaluation and an engineering-based systems approach

Introduction Transition following discharge from mental health hospital is high risk in terms of relapse, readmission and suicide. Discharge planning supports transition and reduces risk. It is a complex activity involving interacting systemic elements. The codesigning a systemic discharge intervention for inpatient mental health settings (MINDS) study aims to improve the process for people being discharged, their carers/supporters and staff who work in mental health services, by understanding, co-designing and evaluating implementation of a systemic approach to discharge planning.Methods and analysisThe MINDS study integrates realist research and an engineering-informed systems approach across three stages. Stage 1 applies realist review and evaluation using a systems approach to develop programme theories of discharge planning. Stage 2 uses an Engineering Better Care framework to codesign a novel systemic discharge intervention, which will be subjected to process and economic evaluation in stage 3. The programme theories and resulting care planning approach will be refined throughout the study ready for a future clinical trial. MINDS is co-led by an expert by experience, with researchers with lived experience co-leading each stage.Ethics and disseminationMINDS stage 1 has received ethical approval from Yorkshire & The Humber—Bradford Leeds (Research Ethics Committee (22/YH/0122). Findings from MINDS will be disseminated via high-impact journal publications and conference presentations, including those with service user and mental health professional audiences. We will establish routes to engage with public and service user communities and National Health Service professionals including blogs, podcasts and short videos.Trial registration numberMINDS is funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR 133013)https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR133013. The realist review protocol is registered on PROSPERO.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021293255.</p