Suicidality and hostility following involuntary hospital treatment

Background Psychiatric patients showing risk to themselves or others can be involuntarily hospitalised. No data is available on whether following hospitalisation there is a reduction in psychopathological indicators of risk such as suicidality and hostility. This study aimed to assess changes in suicidality and hostility levels following involuntary admission and their patient-level predictors. Methods A pooled analysis of studies on involuntary treatment, including 11 countries and 2790 patients was carried out. Suicidality and hostility were measured by the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Results 2790 patients were included; 2129 followed-up after one month and 1864 after three months. 387 (13.9%) patients showed at least moderate suicidality when involuntarily admitted, 107 (5.0%) after one month and 97 (5.2%) after three months. Moderate or higher hostility was found in 1287 (46.1%) patients after admission, 307 (14.5%) after one month, and 172 (9.2%) after three months. Twenty-three (1.2%) patients showed suicidality, and 53 (2.8%) patients hostility at all time-points. Predictors of suicidality three months after admission were: suicidality at baseline, not having a diagnosis of psychotic disorder and being unemployed. Predictors of hostility were: hostility at baseline, not having a psychotic disorder, living alone, and having been hospitalized previously. Conclusions After involuntary hospital admission, the number of patients with significant levels of suicidality and hostility decreases substantially over time, and very few patients show consistently moderate or higher levels of these symptoms. In patients with psychotic disorders these symptoms are more likely to improve. Social factors such as unemployment and isolation could hamper suicidality and hostility reduction and may be targeted in interventions to reduce risk in involuntarily admitted patients

The role of quantitative cross-case analysis in understanding tropical smallholder farmers’ adaptive capacity to climate shocks

Climate shocks are predicted to increase in magnitude and frequency as the climate changes, notably impacting poor and vulnerable communities across the Tropics. The urgency to better understand and improve communities' resilience is reflected in international agreements such as the Paris Agreement and the multiplication of adaptation research and action programs. In turn, the need for collecting and communicating evidence on the climate resilience of communities has increasingly drawn questions concerning how to assess resilience. While empirical case studies are often used to delve into the context-specific nature of resilience, synthesizing results is essential to produce generalizable findings at the scale at which policies are designed. Yet datasets, methods and modalities that enable cross-case analyses that draw from individual local studies are still rare in climate resilience literature. We use empirical case studies on the impacts of El Niño on smallholder households from five countries to test the application of quantitative data aggregation for policy recommendation. We standardized data into an aggregated dataset to explore how key demographic factors affected the impact of climate shocks, modeled as crop loss. We find that while cross-study results partially align with the findings from the individual projects and with theory, several challenges associated with quantitative aggregation remain when examining complex, contextual and multi-dimensional concepts such as resilience. We conclude that future exercises synthesizing cross-site empirical evidence in climate resilience could accelerate research to policy impact by using mixed methods, focusing on specific landscapes or regional scales, and facilitating research through the use of shared frameworks and learning exercises

The ethical desirability of moral bioenhancement: A review of reasons

Background: The debate on the ethical aspects of moral bioenhancement focuses on the desirability of using biomedical as opposed to traditional means to achieve moral betterment. The aim of this paper is to systematically review the ethical reasons presented in the literature for and against moral bioenhancement. Discussion: A review was performed and resulted in the inclusion of 85 articles. We classified the arguments used in those articles in the following six clusters: (1) why we (don't) need moral bioenhancement, (2) it will (not) be possible to reach consensus on what moral bioenhancement should involve, (3) the feasibility of moral bioenhancement and the status of current scientific research, (4) means and processes of arriving at moral improvement matter ethically, (5) arguments related to the freedom, identity and autonomy of the individual, and (6) arguments related to social/group effects and dynamics. We discuss each argument separately, and assess the debate as a whole. First, there is little discussion on what distinguishes moral bioenhancement from treatment of pathological deficiencies in morality. Furthermore, remarkably little attention has been paid so far to the safety, risks and side-effects of moral enhancement, including the risk of identity changes. Finally, many authors overestimate the scientific as well as the practical feasibility of the interventions they discuss, rendering the debate too speculative. Summary: Based on our discussion of the arguments used in the debate on moral enhancement, and our assessment of this debate, we advocate a shift in focus. Instead of speculating about non-realistic hypothetical scenarios such as the genetic engineering of morality, or morally enhancing 'the whole of humanity', we call for a more focused debate on realistic options of biomedical treatment of moral pathologies and the concrete moral questions these treatments raise

A simplified (modified) Duke Activity Status Index (M-DASI) to characterise functional capacity: A secondary analysis of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study

Background Accurate assessment of functional capacity, a predictor of postoperative morbidity and mortality, is essential to improving surgical planning and outcomes. We assessed if all 12 items of the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) were equally important in reflecting exercise capacity. Methods In this secondary cross-sectional analysis of the international, multicentre Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study, we assessed cardiopulmonary exercise testing and DASI data from 1455 participants. Multivariable regression analyses were used to revise the DASI model in predicting an anaerobic threshold (AT) >11 ml kg −1 min −1 and peak oxygen consumption (VO 2 peak) >16 ml kg −1 min −1, cut-points that represent a reduced risk of postoperative complications. Results Five questions were identified to have dominance in predicting AT>11 ml kg −1 min −1 and VO 2 peak>16 ml.kg −1min −1. These items were included in the M-DASI-5Q and retained utility in predicting AT>11 ml.kg −1.min −1 (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic [AUROC]-AT: M-DASI-5Q=0.67 vs original 12-question DASI=0.66) and VO 2 peak (AUROC-VO2 peak: M-DASI-5Q 0.73 vs original 12-question DASI 0.71). Conversely, in a sensitivity analysis we removed one potentially sensitive question related to the ability to have sexual relations, and the ability of the remaining four questions (M-DASI-4Q) to predict an adequate functional threshold remained no worse than the original 12-question DASI model. Adding a dynamic component to the M-DASI-4Q by assessing the chronotropic response to exercise improved its ability to discriminate between those with VO 2 peak>16 ml.kg −1.min −1 and VO 2 peak<16 ml.kg −1.min −1. Conclusions The M-DASI provides a simple screening tool for further preoperative evaluation, including with cardiopulmonary exercise testing, to guide perioperative management

Integration of the Duke Activity Status Index into preoperative risk evaluation: a multicentre prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) questionnaire might help incorporate self-reported functional capacity into preoperative risk assessment. Nonetheless, prognostically important thresholds in DASI scores remain unclear. We conducted a nested cohort analysis of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study to characterise the association of preoperative DASI scores with postoperative death or complications. METHODS: The analysis included 1546 participants (≥40 yr of age) at an elevated cardiac risk who had inpatient noncardiac surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day death or myocardial injury. The secondary outcomes were 30-day death or myocardial infarction, in-hospital moderate-to-severe complications, and 1 yr death or new disability. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to characterise the adjusted association of preoperative DASI scores with outcomes. RESULTS: The DASI score had non-linear associations with outcomes. Self-reported functional capacity better than a DASI score of 34 was associated with reduced odds of 30-day death or myocardial injury (odds ratio: 0.97 per 1 point increase above 34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96-0.99) and 1 yr death or new disability (odds ratio: 0.96 per 1 point increase above 34; 95% CI: 0.92-0.99). Self-reported functional capacity worse than a DASI score of 34 was associated with increased odds of 30-day death or myocardial infarction (odds ratio: 1.05 per 1 point decrease below 34; 95% CI: 1.00-1.09), and moderate-to-severe complications (odds ratio: 1.03 per 1 point decrease below 34; 95% CI: 1.01-1.05). CONCLUSIONS: A DASI score of 34 represents a threshold for identifying patients at risk for myocardial injury, myocardial infarction, moderate-to-severe complications, and new disability