Explore the vast range of titles available.

Importance: The Seamless Care Optimizing the Patient Experience (SCOPE) – Mental Health program is a comprehensive case management and psychiatric care initiative that supports primary care physicians in independent medical practices. This program offers a range of services that aim to enhance primary care capacity for mental health and provide accessible clinical care for patients. With its flexible hub-based approach, this program allows participating sites to tailor their implementation based on their available resources and specific needs within their community. Objectives: The aim of this quality improvement initiative was to investigate the evolution of this collaborative mental health model, focusing on specific site adaptations, local implementation challenges, and opportunities for ongoing development and sustainability across SCOPE sites in the Greater Toronto Area. Method: This evaluation employed a qualitative descriptive design where semi-structured interviews, guided by the Reach Effectiveness Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework were conducted with staff from all 8 SCOPE-Mental Health sites. Site representatives were interviewed virtually between March and July 2023 and data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Findings: The SCOPE-Mental Health model permits flexibility through specific local adaptations led by community need that leverage existing assets either at the site or within the individual community. Adoption by primary care physicians was crucial to program success and facilitated efficiency and interprofessional collaboration. Maintenance efforts included pathway refinement, and marketing and funding considerations. Challenges to program development included continuity of staff, physician compensation issues, and electronic health record interoperability. The SCOPE-Mental Health program fosters integration among unaffiliated primary care offices, hospitals, and community-based resources to improve mental health care. Key recommendations include advocating for sustainable funding and facilitated mechanisms for psychiatric consultations. Conclusions: This initiative offers valuable insights for healthcare organizations seeking to develop similar integrated programs, emphasizing the need for tailored approaches and ongoing evaluation to ensure a lasting impact in underserved communities.

Background Access to traditional mental health services in Canada remains limited, prompting exploration into digital alternatives. The Government of Ontario initiated access to two internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) programs, LifeWorks AbilitiCBT and MindBeacon TAiCBT, for adults with mental health issues. Methods An uncontrolled observational study utilizing secondary retrospective program data was conducted to evaluate the reach, uptake, and psychological symptom changes among participants engaging with either iCBT program. Results Between May 2020 and September 2021, 56,769 individuals enrolled in LifeWorks AbilitiCBT, and 73,356 in MindBeacon TAiCBT. However, substantial exclusions were made: 56% of LifeWorks participants and 68% of MindBeacon participants were ineligible or failed to initiate treatment. Consequently, 25,154 LifeWorks participants and 23,795 MindBeacon participants were included in the analysis. Of these, 22% of LifeWorks and 26% of MindBeacon participants completed over 75% of iCBT treatment. On average, LifeWorks participants received 13 ± SD 7.1 therapist messages and sent 5 ± SD 10.3 messages, while MindBeacon participants received 25 ± SD 20.7 therapist messages and sent 13 ± SD 16.4 messages. LifeWorks included synchronous therapist contact averaging 1.4 ± SD 1.9 h per participant, while MindBeacon was purely asynchronous. Baseline severity of anxiety (37%) and depression symptoms (22%) was higher for LifeWorks participants compared to MindBeacon participants (24% and 10%, respectively). Clinically significant changes in anxiety and depression scores were observed: 22% of LifeWorks and 31% of MindBeacon participants exhibited reliable recovery in PHQ-9 scores, while 26% of LifeWorks and 25% of MindBeacon participants demonstrated reliable recovery in GAD-7 scores. Conclusion In conclusion, iCBT programs show promise for engaged participants with varying levels of severity in anxiety and depression symptoms. Future iterations of iCBT should consider adopting a broad entry criterion to iCBT programming to increase accessibility, especially for those with severe symptoms, alongside integrated intake care pathways, and potential payment structure adjustments for iCBT service providers. Taken all together, these factors could temper high dropout rates post-intake assessment. This evaluation underscores the potential and value of digital mental health interventions for individuals with mild to severe anxiety or depression symptoms, emphasizing the importance of addressing participant dropout.

To address the anticipated rise in mental health symptoms experienced at the population level during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ontario government provided 2 therapist-assisted internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) programs to adults free of charge at the point of service. The study aims to explore the facilitators of and barriers to implementing iCBT at the population level in Ontario, Canada, from the perspective of patients and therapists to better understand how therapist-assisted iCBT programs can be effectively implemented at the population level and inform strategies for enhancing service delivery and integration into the health care system. Using a convenience sampling methodology, semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 therapists who delivered iCBT and 20 patients who received iCBT through either of the publicly funded programs to explore their perspectives of the program. Interview data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis to generate themes. Six salient themes were identified. Facilitators included the therapist-assisted nature of the program; the ease of registration and the lack of cost; and the feasibility of completing the psychoeducational modules given the online and self-paced nature of the program. Barriers included challenges with the online remote modality for developing the therapeutic alliance; the program's generalized nature, which limited customization to individual needs; and a lack of formal integration between the iCBT program and the health care system. Although the program was generally well-received by patients and therapists due to its accessibility and feasibility, the digital format of the program presented both benefits and unique challenges. Strategies for improving the quality of service delivery include opportunities for synchronous communication between therapists and patients, options for increased customization, and the formal integration of iCBT into a broader stepped-care model that centralizes patient referrals between care providers and promotes continuity of care.

Depression and anxiety disorders are common, and treatment often includes psychological interventions. Digital health interventions, delivered through technologies such as web-based programs and mobile apps, are increasingly used in mental health treatment. Acceptability, the extent to which an intervention is viewed positively, has been identified as contributing to patient adherence and engagement with digital health interventions. Acceptability, therefore, impacts the benefit derived from using digital health interventions in treatment. Understanding the acceptability of digital mental health interventions among patients with depression or anxiety disorders is essential to maximize the effectiveness of their treatment. This review investigated the acceptability of technology-based interventions among patients with depression or anxiety disorders. A systematic review was performed based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) guidelines. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid in May 2022. Studies were included if they evaluated digital interventions for the treatment of depression or anxiety disorders and investigated their acceptability among adult patients. Studies were excluded if they targeted only specific populations (eg, those with specific physical health conditions), investigated acceptability in healthy individuals or patients under the age of 18 years, involved no direct interaction between patients and technologies, used technology only as a platform for traditional care (eg, videoconferencing), had patients using technologies only in clinical or laboratory settings, or involved virtual reality technologies. Acceptability outcome data were narratively synthesized by the direction of acceptability using vote counting. Included studies were evaluated using levels of evidence from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The risk of bias was assessed using a tool designed for this review and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). A total of 143 articles met the inclusion criteria, comprising 67 (47%) articles on interventions for depression, 65 (45%) articles on interventions for anxiety disorders, and 11 (8%) articles on interventions for both. Overall, 90 (63%) were randomized controlled trials, 50 (35%) were other quantitative studies, and 3 (2%) were qualitative studies. Interventions used web-based programs, mobile apps, and computer programs. Cognitive behavioral therapy was the basis of 71% (102/143) of the interventions. Digital mental health interventions were generally acceptable among patients with depression or anxiety disorders, with 88% (126/143) indicating positive acceptability, 8% (11/143) mixed results, and 4% (6/143) insufficient information to categorize the direction of acceptability. The available research evidence was of moderate quality. Digital mental health interventions seem to be acceptable to patients with depression or anxiety disorders. Consistent use of validated measures for acceptability would enhance the quality of evidence. Careful design of acceptability as an evaluation outcome can further improve the quality of evidence and reduce the risk of bias. Open Science Framework Y7MJ4; https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SPR8M.

Abstract Background and Hypothesis Antipsychotics are first-line drug treatments for schizophrenia. When antipsychotic monotherapy is ineffective, combining two antipsychotic drugs is common although treatment guidelines warn of possible increases in side effects. Risks of metabolic side effects with antipsychotic polypharmacy have not been fully investigated. This study examined associations between antipsychotic polypharmacy and risk of developing diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia in adults with schizophrenia, and impact of co-prescription of first- and second-generation antipsychotics. Study Design A population-based prospective cohort study was conducted in the United Kingdom using linked primary care, secondary care, mental health, and social deprivation datasets. Cox proportional hazards models with stabilizing weights were used to estimate risk of metabolic disorders among adults with schizophrenia, comparing patients on antipsychotic monotherapy vs polypharmacy, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, and antipsychotic dose. Study Results Median follow-up time across the three cohorts was approximately 14 months. 6.6% developed hypertension in the cohort assembled for this outcome, with polypharmacy conferring an increased risk compared to monotherapy, (adjusted Hazard Ratio = 3.16; P = .021). Patients exposed to exclusive first-generation antipsychotic polypharmacy had greater risk of hypertension compared to those exposed to combined first- and second-generation polypharmacy (adjusted HR 0.29, P = .039). No associations between polypharmacy and risk of diabetes or hyperlipidemia were found. Conclusions Antipsychotic polypharmacy, particularly polypharmacy solely comprised of first-generation antipsychotics, increased the risk of hypertension. Future research employing larger samples, follow-up longer than the current median of 14 months, and more complex methodologies may further elucidate the association reported in this study.

The objective of this study is to explore the association between maternal somatic anxiety in pregnancy and hyperactivity symptoms and ADHD diagnosis in children. Data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children cohort were used to examine the association between somatic anxiety symptoms in pregnancy measured with five items of the Crown-Crisp Experiential Index, ADHD diagnosis in children at 7.5 and 15 years (obtained with the Development and Well-Being Assessment-DAWBA) and hyperactivity at 4 and 16 years (measured with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire hyperactivity subscale-SDQ). Maternal somatic anxiety was associated with ADHD diagnosis at age 7.5 [crude OR = 1.87 (95% CI = 1.21–2.91)], adjusted model [OR = 1.57 (95% CI = 0.99–2.48)]. There was no evidence of association with ADHD at 15: crude OR = 2.27 (95% CI = 0.90–5.71), adjusted OR = 1.65 (95% CI = 0.63–4.35). An association was found at 4 and 16 with the SDQ hyperactivity subscale: crude OR at 4: 1.70 (95% CI =1.37–2.11), adjusted OR = 1.34 (95% CI = 1.07–1.69); crude OR at 16: 1.95 (95% CI = 1.47–2.58), adjusted OR = 1.62 (95% CI = 1.21–2.17).Thus, there was evidence for an association between maternal somatic anxiety in pregnancy and increased hyperactivity symptoms (SDQ) at 4 and 16. There was no association with ADHD diagnosis.

Technological interventions used to treat illnesses and promote health are grouped under the umbrella term of digital therapeutics. The use of digital therapeutics is becoming increasingly common in mental health. Although many technologies are currently being implemented, research supporting their usability, efficacy, and risk requires further examination, especially for those interventions that can be used without support. This review aims to identify the evidence-based, self-directed, technology-based methods of care that can be used in adult patients after they are discharged from mental health services. The interventions reviewed are automated with no human input required (either at the patient's or at the technology's end), so the patients can implement them without any support. A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) guidelines in 3 databases: PubMed, Web of Science, and OVID. The inclusion criteria were self-directed, automated, and technology-based interventions related to mental health, primarily for adults, having a solid evaluation process. The interventions had to be self-directed, in that the participants could use the technology without any external guidance. We identified 36 papers that met the inclusion criteria: 26 randomized controlled trials, 9 nonrandomized controlled trial quantitative studies, and 1 qualitative study. The technologies used included websites, automated text messaging, phone apps, videos, computer software, and integrated voice response. There were 22 studies focused on internet-based cognitive behavioral therapies as a therapeutic paradigm compared with the waitlist, web-based human-delivered therapy, and other interventions. Among these studies, 14 used paradigms other than the internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy. Of the 8 studies comparing guided and unguided digital care, 3 showed no differences, 3 favored guided interventions, and 2 favored unguided interventions. The research also showed that dropout rates were as high as 80%, citing potential problems with the acceptability of the suggested technologies. There is limited research on the efficacy and suitability of self-directed technology-based care options for mental health. Digital technologies have the potential to bridge the gap between ambulatory care and independent living. However, these interventions may need to be developed collaboratively with the users to encourage their acceptability and to avoid high dropout rates.

Suicide is a serious public health problem worldwide, with most suicides occurring in low- and middle-income countries. This nationwide ecological study aimed to explore the relationship between crude suicide rates of the sexes and gender inequality. The data on age and gender-stratified crude suicide rates in all 81 provinces of Türkiye were retracted from the Turkish Statistical Institute database. Gender inequality was measured using Türkiye's provincial-level Gender Equality Index (GEI). Additionally, the following variables were considered gender inequality indicators: early marriages, fertility rate, and marriage/divorce rates; data were obtained from the Turkish Statistical Institute database. Data from 2019 were used to avoid the confounding effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. The associations between gender inequality and crude suicide rate differed between women and men. There was a positive correlation between crude suicide rate and GEI in men aged 45-64 (r=0.294 p<0.01), but no correlations were found in other groups of age and gender. Early marriage rates (r=0.341 p<0.01) and fertility rate (r=0.333 p<0.01) were positively associated with crude suicide rates in women aged 15-44, while divorce/marriage rate (r=-0.256 p<0.05) was negatively related to these rates. Divorce/marriage rate was associated with an increase in men's suicides in both the 45-64 (r=0.452 p<0.01) and 65 and over (r=0.290 p<0.01) age groups. Gender inequality indicators were related to suicide. That relationship may vary across different age and gender groups. The findings may be limited to low- and middle-income countries. Suicide prevention interventions should be designed to account for age group, gender, and cultural characteristics of the place of residence concerning gender.