Management of Agitation During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has radically altered delivery of care in emergency settings. Unprecedented hardship due to ongoing fears of exposure and threats to personal safety, along with societal measures enacted to curb disease transmission, have had broad psychosocial impact on patients and healthcare workers alike. These changes can significantly affect diagnosing and managing behavioral emergencies such as agitation in the emergency department. On behalf of the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry, we highlight unique considerations for patients with severe behavioral symptoms and staff members managing symptoms of agitation during COVID-19. Early detection and treatment of agitation, precautions to minimize staff hazards, coordination with security personnel and psychiatric services, and avoidance of coercive strategies that cause respiratory depression will help mitigate heightened risks to safety caused by this outbreak

Online randomised factorial trial of electronic Screening and Brief Intervention for alcohol use in pregnancy: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 1 in 7 pregnant women in the USA report past-month alcohol use. Strong evidence connects prenatal alcohol exposure with a range of adverse perinatal outcomes, including the spectrum of conditions known as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders. Screening and Brief Intervention (SBI) has been recommended for pregnant women but has proven difficult to implement. This study will test the efficacy of single-session technology-delivered SBI (electronic SBI) for alcohol use in pregnancy, while simultaneously evaluating the possible additional benefit of tailored text messages and/or booster sessions in a 3×2 factorial trial. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: This full factorial trial will use online advertising and clinic-based flyers to recruit pregnant women meeting criteria for unhealthy alcohol use, and randomly assign them to one of six conditions crossing three levels of brief intervention (none, single 120-minute session and single session plus two 5-minute boosters) with two levels of tailored text messaging (none vs twice weekly messages). The primary analysis will test for dose-response effects of the brief intervention on alcohol abstinence, defined as no self-report of alcohol use in the 90 days prior to 34 weeks\u27 gestation, and negative results for ethyl glucuronide analysis of fingernail samples. Secondary analyses will examine main and interaction effects of tailored text messaging as well as intervention effects on birth outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was provided by the Michigan State University Biomedical and Health Institutional Review Board (STUDY00005298). Results will be presented at conferences and community forums, in addition to being published in a peer-reviewed journal. Intervention content demonstrating sufficient efficacy and safety will be made publicly available. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04332172)

Comparison of major depression diagnostic classification probability using the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews among women in pregnancy or postpartum: An individual participant data meta‐analysis

OBJECTIVES: A previous individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) identified differences in major depression classification rates between different diagnostic interviews, controlling for depressive symptoms on the basis of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. We aimed to determine whether similar results would be seen in a different population, using studies that administered the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in pregnancy or postpartum. METHODS: Data accrued for an EPDS diagnostic accuracy IPDMA were analysed. Binomial generalised linear mixed models were fit to compare depression classification odds for the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), controlling for EPDS scores and participant characteristics. RESULTS: Among fully structured interviews, the MINI (15 studies, 2,532 participants, 342 major depression cases) classified depression more often than the CIDI (3 studies, 2,948 participants, 194 major depression cases; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.21, 11.43]). Compared with the semistructured SCID (28 studies, 7,403 participants, 1,027 major depression cases), odds with the CIDI (interaction aOR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.85, 0.92]) and MINI (interaction aOR = 0.95, 95% CI [0.92, 0.99]) increased less as EPDS scores increased. CONCLUSION: Different interviews may not classify major depression equivalently

Costs of a motivational enhancement therapy coupled with cognitive behavioral therapy versus brief advice for pregnant substance users.

To determine and compare costs of a nurse-administered behavioral intervention for pregnant substance users that integrated motivational enhancement therapy with cognitive behavioral therapy (MET-CBT) to brief advice (BA) administered by an obstetrical provider. Both interventions were provided concurrent with prenatal care.We conducted a micro-costing study that prospectively collected detailed resource utilization and unit cost data for each of the two intervention arms (MET-CBT and BA) within the context of a randomized controlled trial. A three-step approach for identifying, measuring and valuing resource utilization was used. All cost estimates were inflation adjusted to 2011 U.S. dollars.A total of 82 participants received the MET-CBT intervention and 86 participants received BA. From the societal perspective, the total cost (including participants' time cost) of the MET-CBT intervention was $120,483 or$1,469 per participant. In contrast, the total cost of the BA intervention was $27,199 or$316 per participant. Personnel costs (nurse therapists and obstetric providers) for delivering the intervention sessions and supervising the program composed the largest share of the MET-CBT intervention costs. Program set up costs, especially intervention material design and training costs, also contributed substantially to the overall cost.Implementation of an MET-CBT program to promote drug abstinence in pregnant women is associated with modest costs. Future cost effectiveness and cost benefit analyses integrating costs with outcomes and benefits data will enable a more comprehensive understanding of the intervention in improving the care of substance abusing pregnant women

Comparison of per participant cost: Brief Advice and Motivational Enhancement Therapy with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.

<p>This figure illustrates the relative distribution of the four cost categories (i.e., set up costs, time-dependent program costs, variable program costs, and societal costs) for the two intervention arms, i.e., Brief Advice and Motivational Enhancement Therapy with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, respectively.</p

Resource utilization categories and cost measurement.

<p>Resource utilization categories and cost measurement.</p

Estimated per participant cost in sensitivity analysis.

a<p>Assume staff members are already capable of running program and delivering therapy.</p>b<p>Wage rate of resident physicians and fellows were replaced by wage rate of attending physicians.</p