Managing medical emergencies in mental health settings using an interprofessional in-situ simulation training programme: a mixed methods evaluation study

BACKGROUND: In the UK, people with severe mental illness die up to 20years earlier than the general population, prompting increased focus on physical health in mental illness. However, training for mental health inpatient staff to meet patients' physical health needs has not received the same attention, with physical health training often being reactive and lacking evidence of effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate an interprofessional, in situ, simulation training intervention for managing medical deterioration in mental health settings. Investigating the impact of training on: 1. Participants' knowledge, confidence, and attitudes towards managing medical deterioration; and 2. Incident reporting, as an objective index of incident management. Participants' perceptions of the impact on their practice were qualitatively explored. DESIGN: This evaluation employed a mixed-methods pre-post intervention design. PARTICIPANTS & SETTINGS: Fifty-three healthcare professionals participated including: mental health nurses, psychiatrists, healthcare assistants, and activity co-ordinators from two busy psychiatric triage wards in South London, UK. METHODS: The intervention comprised eight half-day sessions delivered weekly across two wards. Structured surveys assessed participants' knowledge, confidence, and attitudes towards medical deterioration pre and post training. Participants' experience of training was qualitatively captured through post-course surveys and focus groups three months post training. Incident reporting rates for seven-month periods pre and post training were compared. RESULTS: Following training, participants showed significant improvement in knowledge (p<0.001), confidence (p<0.001), and attitudes towards (p<0.02) managing medical deterioration. Incident reporting increased by 33% following training. Participants' reported improved confidence in managing medical deterioration, better understanding of effective communication, improved self-reflection and team working, and an increased sense of responsibility for patients' physical health. CONCLUSIONS: Interprofessional, in situ simulation training for medical deterioration yielded promising outcomes for individuals and teams. Simulation is an under-used training modality in mental health, offering a holistic training approach with the potential to provide educational and clinical benefits while supporting workforce resilience

Zebrafish Ciliopathy Screen Plus Human Mutational Analysis Identifies C21orf59 and CCDC65 Defects as Causing Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia

Primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is caused when defects of motile cilia lead to chronic airway infections, male infertility, and situs abnormalities. Multiple causative PCD mutations account for only 65% of cases, suggesting that many genes essential for cilia function remain to be discovered. By using zebrafish morpholino knockdown of PCD candidate genes as an in vivo screening platform, we identified c21orf59, ccdc65, and c15orf26 as critical for cilia motility. c21orf59 and c15orf26 knockdown in zebrafish and planaria blocked outer dynein arm assembly, and ccdc65 knockdown altered cilia beat pattern. Biochemical analysis in Chlamydomonas revealed that the C21orf59 ortholog FBB18 is a flagellar matrix protein that accumulates specifically when cilia motility is impaired. The Chlamydomonas ida6 mutant identifies CCDC65/FAP250 as an essential component of the nexin-dynein regulatory complex. Analysis of 295 individuals with PCD identified recessive truncating mutations of C21orf59 in four families and CCDC65 in two families. Similar to findings in zebrafish and planaria, mutations in C21orf59 caused loss of both outer and inner dynein arm components. Our results characterize two genes associated with PCD-causing mutations and elucidate two distinct mechanisms critical for motile cilia function: dynein arm assembly for C21orf59 and assembly of the nexin-dynein regulatory complex for CCDC65

Therapeutic Anticoagulation with Heparin in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to morbidity and mortality among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation would improve outcomes in critically ill patients with Covid-19. METHODS: In an open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized clinical trial, critically ill patients with severe Covid-19 were randomly assigned to a pragmatically defined regimen of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in accordance with local usual care. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. RESULTS: The trial was stopped when the prespecified criterion for futility was met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. Data on the primary outcome were available for 1098 patients (534 assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and 564 assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis). The median value for organ support-free days was 1 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and was 4 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis (adjusted proportional odds ratio, 0.83; 95% credible interval, 0.67 to 1.03; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 99.9%). The percentage of patients who survived to hospital discharge was similar in the two groups (62.7% and 64.5%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 0.84; 95% credible interval, 0.64 to 1.11). Major bleeding occurred in 3.8% of the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 2.3% of those assigned to usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin did not result in a greater probability of survival to hospital discharge or a greater number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support than did usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. (REMAP-CAP, ACTIV-4a, and ATTACC ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT04372589.)