Effects of Occupational Therapy on Hospitalized Chronic Schizophrenia Patients with Severe Negative Symptoms

The aim of this study was to determine whether occupational therapy (OT) can improve the interpersonal relationships and negative symptoms of hospitalized chronic schizophrenia patients with severe negative symptoms. Subjects were 38 patients with chronic schizophrenia. They were randomly divided into an OT group and a control group. Patients in the OT group participated in cooking activities once a week for 15 weeks, while patients in the control group did not. During this period, both groups had the usual treatment except for the cooking activities. In interviews, the patient was asked to place a chair toward the interviewer (a therapist). The angle and distance from the interviewer were taken as indicators of an ability to have interpersonal relationships. Negative symptoms were evaluated with the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS). Patients who received OT were able to sit at the smaller angle and shorter distance from the interviewer than before OT (p=0.015 and p=0.013, respectively). The total SANS score was lower after OT than before OT (p=0.033). In the control group, the distance from the interviewer also decreased during the experimental period (p=0.040) but the seating angle and the SANS scores did not change. The results suggest that OT can help to improve a relationship allowing the patient to face the therapist and that it might improve negative symptoms of schizophrenia

General practitioners' views and experiences in caring for patients after sepsis:a qualitative interview study

Contains fulltext : 232438.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Patients surviving critical illnesses, such as sepsis, often suffer from long-term complications. After discharge from hospital, most patients are treated in primary care. Little is known how general practitioners (GPs) perform critical illness aftercare and how it can be improved. Within a randomised controlled trial, an outreach training programme has been developed and applied. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to describe GPs' views and experiences of caring for postsepsis patients and of participating a specific outreach training. DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative interviews. SETTING: 14 primary care practices in the metropolitan area of Berlin, Germany. PARTICIPANTS: 14 GPs who had participated in a structured sepsis aftercare programme in primary care. RESULTS: Themes identified in sepsis aftercare were: continuity of care and good relationship with patients, GP's experiences during their patient's critical illness and impact of persisting symptoms. An outreach education as part of the intervention was considered by the GPs to be acceptable, helpful to improve knowledge of the management of postintensive care complications and useful for sepsis aftercare in daily practice. CONCLUSIONS: GPs provide continuity of care to patients surviving sepsis. Better communication at the intensive care unit-GP interface and training in management of long-term complications of sepsis may be helpful to improve sepsis aftercare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN61744782

Systematic review of economic evaluations and cost analyses of guideline implementation strategies

Objectives To appraise the quality of economic studies undertaken as part of evaluations of guideline implementation strategies; determine their resources use; and recommend methods to improve future studies. Methods Systematic review of economic studies undertaken alongside robust study designs of clinical guideline implementation strategies published (1966-1998). Studies assessed against the BMJ economic evaluations guidelines for each stage of the guideline process (guideline development, implementation and treatment). Results 235 studies were identified, 63 reported some information on cost. Only 3 studies provided evidence that their guideline was effective and efficient. 38 reported the treatment costs only, 12 implementation and treatment costs, 11 implementation costs alone, and two guideline development, implementation and treatment costs. No study gave reasonably complete information on costs. Conclusions Very few satisfactory economic evaluations of guideline implementation strategies have been performed. Current evaluations have numerous methodological defects and rarely consider all relevant costs and benefits. Future evaluations should focus on evaluating the implementation of evidence based guidelines. Keywords: Cost-effectiveness analysis, physician (or health care professional) behaviour, practice guidelines, quality improvement, systematic review.Peer reviewedAuthor versio

HIV-1 drug-resistance patterns among patients on failing treatment in a large number of European countries

Background: Information about patterns of HIV-1 drug resistance among treatment-exposed patients is crucial for the development of novel effective drugs. Currently no system exists that monitors patterns of resistance in patients failing therapy. Methods: The study included 1,988 HIV-1 sequences from patients experiencing therapy failure collected between 2000 and 2004 in 15 European countries. Genotypic resistance was interpreted using the ANRS algorithm. Phenotypic resistance was predicted using the Virco geno- to phenotype system. Results: 80.7% of the sequences included at least one drug-resistance mutation. Mutations were found for NRTIs (73.5%), NNRTIs (48.5%), and protease inhibitors (35.8%). Ninety percent of sequences with genotypic resistance harbored M184V, M41L, K103N, D67N, and/or T215Y. Among NRTIs, resistance was most frequently predicted for lamivudine. About half of all sequences had reduced susceptibility for NNRTIs. Resistance to most boosted protease inhibitors was found in &lt; 25%. No sequence had resistance to all currently available drugs. Conclusion: Levels of resistance among patients with therapy failure were high. The patterns of resistance reflect resistance to drugs available for a longer time. Fully suppressive regimens can be designed even for the most mutated HIV because boosted protease inhibitors have remained active against most circulating viruses and new drug classes have become available.</p

Stakeholders in support systems for self-care for chronic illness: the gap between expectations and reality regarding their identity, roles and relationships

Background and objective: The spread of self-care holds the promise of containing chronic illness burden. Falling within the framework of a FP7 collaborative research project, this paper reports the views of key informants from six countries regarding who the main stakeholders are at different levels in the support system for self-care for patients with chronic illness (SSSC) and how they accomplish their role and collaborate. Methods: 90 Interviews with purposefully selected key informants from Bulgaria, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and United Kingdom were conducted. Interviews involved government and local authorities, politicians, academics, health professionals and private sector representatives. Interviewers followed an expert opinion-based guide. Analysis involved a cross-country examination with thematic analysis and framework method techniques. Results Key informants described the ideal SSSC as inclusive, interdependent and patient-centred. The following main stakeholders in SSSC were identified: patients, governments, health-care professionals, associations, private companies and the media. In the current SSSCs, collaboration among stakeholders within and across different levels was said to be lacking. Patients were seen as playing a passive subordinate role based on the following: their own attitudes; the paternalistic and medicalized attitudes of the health-care professionals; their misrepresentation by patient associations; and their exposure to the damaging influences of media and industries. Conclusions Making SSSC patient-centred constitutes the greatest challenge for European authorities. Strategies must be revised for promoting patient participation. They should undergo changes so as to promote industry and media social responsibility and patient association advocacy capacity

Elevated risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants compared with Alpha variant in vaccinated individuals

The extent to which severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOCs) break through infection- or vaccine-induced immunity is not well understood. We analyzed 28,578 sequenced SARS-CoV-2 samples from individuals with known immune status obtained through national community testing in the Netherlands from March to August 2021. We found evidence of an increased risk of infection by the Beta (B.1.351), Gamma (P.1), or Delta (B.1.617.2) variants compared with the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant after vaccination. No clear differences were found between vaccines. However, the effect was larger in the first 14 to 59 days after complete vaccination compared with ≥60 days. In contrast to vaccine-induced immunity, there was no increased risk for reinfection with Beta, Gamma, or Delta variants relative to the Alpha variant in individuals with infection-induced immunity.</p

Implementation science in healthcare: Introduction and perspective

Item does not contain fulltextImplementation science is the scientific study of the methods to promote the uptake of research findings into routine healthcare in clinical, organisational, or policy contexts. The presence of gaps between knowledge and practice is well documented and a range of strategies is available to overcome these gaps. To optimize their impact, it is recommended that implementation strategies are tailored to the target population, setting and goals for improvement. Themes for future research in the field are: implementation of personalized medicine, the economics of implementation, knowledge implementation in various health professions, patient involvement in implementation, and a better understanding of the determinants of implementation. Addressing these challenges requires dedicated training programs, research funding, and networks for effective collaboration with stakeholders in healthcare

Does the world need a scientific society for research on how to improve healthcare?

Contains fulltext : 110957.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)In this editorial, we reflect on the arguments for starting a scientific society focused on research on how to improve healthcare. This society would take an inclusive approach to what constitutes healthcare. For instance, it should include mental health healthcare, treatment for substance abuse, the work of allied health professions, and preventive healthcare. The society would be open to researchers from all traditions. Thus, we take an inclusive approach to what constitutes scientific research, as long as it uses rigorous methods, is focused on improving healthcare, and aims at knowledge that can be transferred across settings. The society would primarily target scientific researchers but would invite others with an interest in this area of research, regardless of their discipline, position, field of application, or group affiliation (e.g., improvement science, behavioral medicine, knowledge translation). A society would need fruitful collaboration with related societies and organizations, which may include having combined meetings. Special links may be developed with one or more journals. A website to provide information on relevant resources, events, and training opportunities is another key activity. It would also provide a voice for the field at funding agencies, political arenas, and similar institutions. An organizational structure and financial resources are required to develop and run these activities. Our aim is to start an international debate, to discover if we can establish a shared vision across academics and stakeholders engaged with creating scientific knowledge on how to improve healthcare. We invite readers to express their views in the online questionnaire accessed by following the URL link provided at the end of the editorial

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in primary care: an observational pilot study of seven generic instruments

Contains fulltext : 136484.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been introduced in studies to assess healthcare performance. The development of PROMs for primary care poses specific challenges, including a preference for generic measures that can be used across diseases, including early phases or mild conditions. This pilot study aimed to explore the potential usefulness of seven generic measures for assessing health outcomes in primary care patients. METHODS: A total of 300 patients in three general practices were invited to participate in the study, shortly after their visit to the general practitioner. Patients received a written questionnaire, containing seven validated instruments, focused on patient empowerment (PAM-13 or EC-17), quality of life (EQ-5D or SF-12), mental health (GHQ-12), enablement (PEI) and perceived treatment effect (GPE). Furthermore, questions on non-specific symptoms and number of GP contacts were included. After 4 weeks patients received a second, identical, questionnaire. Response and missing items, total scores and dispersion, responsiveness, and associations between instruments and other measures were examined. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients completed the questionnaire at baseline, of whom 98 completed it both at baseline and 4 weeks later (response rate: 32.7%). The instruments had a full completion rate of 80% or higher. Differences between baseline and follow up were significant for the EQ-5D (p = 0.026), SF-12 PCS (p = 0.026) and the GPE (p = 0.006). A strong correlation (r >/= 0.6) was found between the SF-12 MCS and GHQ-12, at both baseline measurement and after four weeks. Other observed associations between instruments were moderately strong. No strong correlations were found between instruments and non-specific symptoms or number of GP contacts. CONCLUSIONS: The present study is among the first to explore the use of generic patient-reported outcome measures in primary care. It provides several leads for developing a generic PROM questionnaire in primary care as well as for potential limitations of such instruments