Impact of pharmacist counselling on clozapine knowledge

Clozapine is the only antipsychotic with evidence for efficacy in treatment of resistant schizophrenia but it carries a high side effect burden. Patient information is provided but may be poorly retained. This study aims to examine the impact of pharmacist counselling upon patient knowledge of clozapine. Outpatients, aged 18 years and over, attending St. Patrick's University Hospital, Dublin, participated in this study between June and August 2015. The intervention consisted of pharmacist counselling on two occasions one month apart. Knowledge was assessed using a 28-point checklist devised from the currently available clozapine patient information sources, at baseline and after each counselling session. Ethics approval was obtained. Twenty-five participants (40% female; mean age 45.1 years, SD 9.82; 64% unemployed, 28% smokers) showed an improvement in knowledge scores of clozapine from baseline to postcounselling on each occasion with an overall improvement in knowledge score, from baseline to postcounselling at one month, of 39.43%; p < 0.001. This study adds to the evidence that interventions involving pharmacist counselling can improve patient knowledge, whilst the specific knowledge gained relating to recognition of side effects may help patients towards more empowerment regarding their treatment

The UK clinical eye research strategy: refreshing research priorities for clinical eye research in the UK

To validate and update the 2013 James Lind Alliance (JLA) Sight Loss and Vision Priority Setting Partnership (PSP)'s research priorities for Ophthalmology, as part of the UK Clinical Eye Research Strategy. Twelve ophthalmology research themes were identified from the JLA report. They were allocated to five Clinical Study Groups of diverse stakeholders who reviewed the top 10 research priorities for each theme. Using an online survey (April 2021-February 2023), respondents were invited to complete one or more of nine subspecialty surveys. Respondents indicated which of the research questions they considered important and subsequently ranked them. In total, 2240 people responded to the survey (mean age, 59.3 years), from across the UK. 68.1% were female. 68.2% were patients, 22.3% healthcare professionals or vision researchers, 7.1% carers, and 2.1% were charity support workers. Highest ranked questions by subspecialty: Cataract (prevention), Cornea (improving microbial keratitis treatment), Optometric (impact of integration of ophthalmic primary and secondary care via community optometric care pathways), Refractive (factors influencing development and/or progression of refractive error), Childhood onset (improving early detection of visual disorders), Glaucoma (effective and improved treatments), Neuro-ophthalmology (improvements in prevention, diagnosis and treatment of neurodegeneration affecting vision), Retina (improving prevention, diagnosis and treatment of dry age-related macular degeneration), Uveitis (effective treatments for ocular and orbital inflammatory diseases). A decade after the initial PSP, the results refocus the most important research questions for each subspecialty, and prime targeted research proposals within Ophthalmology, a chronically underfunded specialty given the substantial burden of disability caused by eye disease. [Abstract copyright: © 2024. The Author(s).

A systematic review of the nature and efficacy of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy interventions

In the absence of a single comprehensive systematic review of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy interventions across all settings, we reviewed the methodological quality, effectiveness and efficacy of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy interventions on irrational/rational beliefs. We explored the impact of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy on wider outcomes (e.g., mental health) and identified the characteristics of successful interventions. PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and PubMed were systematically searched up to December 2023 with 162 Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy intervention studies identified which included a validated measure of irrational/rational beliefs. Where possible, effect size for irrational/rational belief change was reported and data was analysed through a qualitative approach. Using the Mixed Methods Appraisal tool, methodological quality within the Sport and Exercise domain was assessed as good, whilst all other domains were considered low in quality, with insufficient detail provided on intervention characteristics and delivery. Most studies were conducted in the United States, within the Education domain, and assessed irrational beliefs in non-clinical adult samples. Overall, studies reported significant reductions in irrational beliefs, increases in rational beliefs and improvements in mental health outcomes (e.g., depression). More successful interventions were delivered by trained Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy practitioners, adopted the ABC framework and were longer in duration. We highlight the importance of designing and conducting rigorous future Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy research to generate clearer insights as to its impact on irrational/rational beliefs and mental health outcomes

A systematic review of the nature and efficacy of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy interventions

In the absence of a single comprehensive systematic review of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy interventions across all settings, we reviewed the methodological quality, effectiveness and efficacy of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy interventions on irrational/rational beliefs. We explored the impact of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy on wider outcomes (e.g., mental health) and identified the characteristics of successful interventions. PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and PubMed were systematically searched up to December 2023 with 162 Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy intervention studies identified which included a validated measure of irrational/rational beliefs. Where possible, effect size for irrational/rational belief change was reported and data was analysed through a qualitative approach. Using the Mixed Methods Appraisal tool, methodological quality within the Sport and Exercise domain was assessed as good, whilst all other domains were considered low in quality, with insufficient detail provided on intervention characteristics and delivery. Most studies were conducted in the United States, within the Education domain, and assessed irrational beliefs in non-clinical adult samples. Overall, studies reported significant reductions in irrational beliefs, increases in rational beliefs and improvements in mental health outcomes (e.g., depression). More successful interventions were delivered by trained Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy practitioners, adopted the ABC framework and were longer in duration. We highlight the importance of designing and conducting rigorous future Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy research to generate clearer insights as to its impact on irrational/rational beliefs and mental health outcomes. </p

The UK clinical eye research strategy: refreshing research priorities for clinical eye research in the UK

To validate and update the 2013 James Lind Alliance (JLA) Sight Loss and Vision Priority Setting Partnership (PSP)'s research priorities for Ophthalmology, as part of the UK Clinical Eye Research Strategy. Twelve ophthalmology research themes were identified from the JLA report. They were allocated to five Clinical Study Groups of diverse stakeholders who reviewed the top 10 research priorities for each theme. Using an online survey (April 2021-February 2023), respondents were invited to complete one or more of nine subspecialty surveys. Respondents indicated which of the research questions they considered important and subsequently ranked them. In total, 2240 people responded to the survey (mean age, 59.3 years), from across the UK. 68.1% were female. 68.2% were patients, 22.3% healthcare professionals or vision researchers, 7.1% carers, and 2.1% were charity support workers. Highest ranked questions by subspecialty: Cataract (prevention), Cornea (improving microbial keratitis treatment), Optometric (impact of integration of ophthalmic primary and secondary care via community optometric care pathways), Refractive (factors influencing development and/or progression of refractive error), Childhood onset (improving early detection of visual disorders), Glaucoma (effective and improved treatments), Neuro-ophthalmology (improvements in prevention, diagnosis and treatment of neurodegeneration affecting vision), Retina (improving prevention, diagnosis and treatment of dry age-related macular degeneration), Uveitis (effective treatments for ocular and orbital inflammatory diseases). A decade after the initial PSP, the results refocus the most important research questions for each subspecialty, and prime targeted research proposals within Ophthalmology, a chronically underfunded specialty given the substantial burden of disability caused by eye disease

The UK clinical eye research strategy: refreshing research priorities for clinical eye research in the UK.

ObjectivesTo validate and update the 2013 James Lind Alliance (JLA) Sight Loss and Vision Priority Setting Partnership (PSP)'s research priorities for Ophthalmology, as part of the UK Clinical Eye Research Strategy.MethodsTwelve ophthalmology research themes were identified from the JLA report. They were allocated to five Clinical Study Groups of diverse stakeholders who reviewed the top 10 research priorities for each theme. Using an online survey (April 2021-February 2023), respondents were invited to complete one or more of nine subspecialty surveys. Respondents indicated which of the research questions they considered important and subsequently ranked them.ResultsIn total, 2240 people responded to the survey (mean age, 59.3 years), from across the UK. 68.1% were female. 68.2% were patients, 22.3% healthcare professionals or vision researchers, 7.1% carers, and 2.1% were charity support workers. Highest ranked questions by subspecialty: Cataract (prevention), Cornea (improving microbial keratitis treatment), Optometric (impact of integration of ophthalmic primary and secondary care via community optometric care pathways), Refractive (factors influencing development and/or progression of refractive error), Childhood onset (improving early detection of visual disorders), Glaucoma (effective and improved treatments), Neuro-ophthalmology (improvements in prevention, diagnosis and treatment of neurodegeneration affecting vision), Retina (improving prevention, diagnosis and treatment of dry age-related macular degeneration), Uveitis (effective treatments for ocular and orbital inflammatory diseases).ConclusionsA decade after the initial PSP, the results refocus the most important research questions for each subspecialty, and prime targeted research proposals within Ophthalmology, a chronically underfunded specialty given the substantial burden of disability caused by eye disease

The UK clinical eye research strategy: refreshing research priorities for clinical eye research in the UK.

Funder: Moorfields Eye Charity Macular SocietyOBJECTIVES: To validate and update the 2013 James Lind Alliance (JLA) Sight Loss and Vision Priority Setting Partnership (PSP)'s research priorities for Ophthalmology, as part of the UK Clinical Eye Research Strategy. METHODS: Twelve ophthalmology research themes were identified from the JLA report. They were allocated to five Clinical Study Groups of diverse stakeholders who reviewed the top 10 research priorities for each theme. Using an online survey (April 2021-February 2023), respondents were invited to complete one or more of nine subspecialty surveys. Respondents indicated which of the research questions they considered important and subsequently ranked them. RESULTS: In total, 2240 people responded to the survey (mean age, 59.3 years), from across the UK. 68.1% were female. 68.2% were patients, 22.3% healthcare professionals or vision researchers, 7.1% carers, and 2.1% were charity support workers. Highest ranked questions by subspecialty: Cataract (prevention), Cornea (improving microbial keratitis treatment), Optometric (impact of integration of ophthalmic primary and secondary care via community optometric care pathways), Refractive (factors influencing development and/or progression of refractive error), Childhood onset (improving early detection of visual disorders), Glaucoma (effective and improved treatments), Neuro-ophthalmology (improvements in prevention, diagnosis and treatment of neurodegeneration affecting vision), Retina (improving prevention, diagnosis and treatment of dry age-related macular degeneration), Uveitis (effective treatments for ocular and orbital inflammatory diseases). CONCLUSIONS: A decade after the initial PSP, the results refocus the most important research questions for each subspecialty, and prime targeted research proposals within Ophthalmology, a chronically underfunded specialty given the substantial burden of disability caused by eye disease

The UK clinical eye research strategy: refreshing research priorities for clinical eye research in the UK

Objectives To validate and update the 2013 James Lind Alliance (JLA) Sight Loss and Vision Priority Setting Partnership (PSP)’s research priorities for Ophthalmology, as part of the UK Clinical Eye Research Strategy. Methods Twelve ophthalmology research themes were identified from the JLA report. They were allocated to five Clinical Study Groups of diverse stakeholders who reviewed the top 10 research priorities for each theme. Using an online survey (April 2021-February 2023), respondents were invited to complete one or more of nine subspecialty surveys. Respondents indicated which of the research questions they considered important and subsequently ranked them. Results In total, 2240 people responded to the survey (mean age, 59.3 years), from across the UK. 68.1% were female. 68.2% were patients, 22.3% healthcare professionals or vision researchers, 7.1% carers, and 2.1% were charity support workers. Highest ranked questions by subspecialty: Cataract (prevention), Cornea (improving microbial keratitis treatment), Optometric (impact of integration of ophthalmic primary and secondary care via community optometric care pathways), Refractive (factors influencing development and/or progression of refractive error), Childhood onset (improving early detection of visual disorders), Glaucoma (effective and improved treatments), Neuro-ophthalmology (improvements in prevention, diagnosis and treatment of neurodegeneration affecting vision), Retina (improving prevention, diagnosis and treatment of dry age-related macular degeneration), Uveitis (effective treatments for ocular and orbital inflammatory diseases). Conclusions A decade after the initial PSP, the results refocus the most important research questions for each subspecialty, and prime targeted research proposals within Ophthalmology, a chronically underfunded specialty given the substantial burden of disability caused by eye disease