Shared decision making has found its way into mental health care to a limited extent only, and especially "challenging" patients do not benefit from this approach. The authors describe barriers to ...shared decision making among mental health professionals and among patients. They propose an integrative approach-SDM-PLUS-that fosters shared decision making in mental health settings. SDM-PLUS empowers both patients and mental health care providers. Patients are empowered to become more active and self-confident and to acquire greater skills in regard to health literacy and communication. Providers are trained in analyzing decisional situations and are empowered to use a wider array of communication strategies to optimize patient participation.
People with mental illness struggle with symptoms and with public stigma. Some accept common prejudices and lose self-esteem, resulting in shame and self-stigma, which may affect their interactions ...with mental health professionals. This study explored whether self-stigma and shame are associated with consumers' preferences for participation in medical decision making and their behavior in psychiatric consultations.
In a cross-sectional study conducted in Germany, 329 individuals with a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder or an affective disorder and their psychiatrists provided sociodemographic and illness-related information. Self-stigma, shame, locus of control, and views about clinical decision making were assessed by self-report. Psychiatrists rated their impression of the decision-making behavior of consumers. Regression analyses and structural equation modeling were used to determine the association of self-stigma and shame with clinical decision making.
Self-stigma was not related to consumers' participation preferences, but it was associated with some aspects of communicative behavior. Active and critical behavior (for example, expressing views, daring to challenge the doctor's opinion, and openly speaking out about disagreements with the doctor) was associated with less shame, less self-stigma, more self-responsibility, less attribution of external control to powerful others, and more years of education.
Self-stigma and shame were associated with less participative and critical behavior, which probably leads to clinical encounters that involve less shared decision making and more paternalistic decision making. Paternalistic decision making may reinforce self-stigma and lead to poorer health outcomes. Therefore, interventions that reduce self-stigma and increase consumers' critical and participative communication may improve health outcomes.
The clearest advantage of new generation, atypical antipsychotics is a reduced risk of extrapyramidal side-effects (EPS), compared with conventional compounds. These findings might have been biased ...by the use of the high-potency antipsychotic haloperidol as a comparator in most of the trials. We aimed to establish whether the new drugs induce fewer EPS than low-potency conventional antipsychotics.
We did a meta-analysis of all randomised controlled trials in which new generation antipsychotics had been compared with low-potency (equivalent or less potent than chlorpromazine) conventional drugs. We included studies that met quality criteria A or B in the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook, and assessed quality with the Jadad scale. The primary outcome of interest was the number of patients who had at least one EPS. We used risk differences and 95% CIs as measures of effect size.
We identified 31 studies with a total of 2320 participants. Of the new generation drugs, only clozapine was associated with significantly fewer EPS (RD=-0.15, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.4, p=0.008) and higher efficacy than low-potency conventional drugs. Reduced frequency of EPS seen with olanzapine was of borderline significance (-0.15, -0.31 to -0.01, p=0.07). Only one inconclusive trial of amisulpride, quetiapine, and risperidone and no investigations of ziprasidone and sertindole were identified, but some evidence indicates that zotepine and remoxipride do not lead to fewer EPS than low-potency antipsychotics. Mean doses less than 600 mg/day of chlorpromazine or its equivalent had no higher risk of EPS than new generation drugs. As a group, new generation drugs were moderately more efficacious than low-potency antipsychotics, largely irrespective of the comparator doses used.
Optimum doses of low-potency conventional antipsychotics might not induce more EPS than new generation drugs. Potential advantages in efficacy of the new generation drugs should be a factor in clinical treatment decisions to use these rather than conventional drugs.
Background
Shared decision making (SDM) is appreciated as a promising model of communication between clinicians and patients. However, in acute mental health settings, its implementation is still ...unsatisfactory.
Objective
The aim of this study is to examine barriers and facilitators of SDM with acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia.
Design
A qualitative interview study was performed.
Setting and Participants
The analysis is based on interviews with participants (patients and staff members) of the intervention group of the randomised‐controlled SDMPLUS trial that demonstrated a significant improvement of SDM measures for patients with schizophrenia on acute psychiatric wards.
Main Variables Studied
Interviews addressed treatment decisions made during the current inpatient stay. The interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.
Results
A total of 40 interviews were analysed and 131 treatment decisions were identified. According to the interviewees, SDM had taken place in 29% of the decisions, whereas 59% of the decisions were made without SDM. In 16%, a clear judgement could not be made. Barriers and facilitators of SDM were categorised into patient factors, clinician factors, setting factors and others. Clinicians mostly reported patient factors (e.g., symptoms) as barriers towards SDM, which were not mirrored on the patients' side. Facilitators included patient as well as clinician behaviour during consultations.
Conclusion
Even in the context of a successful SDM intervention, the implementation of SDM for patients in the very acute stages of schizophrenia is often not possible. However, strong facilitators for SDM have also been identified, which should be used for further implementation of SDM.
Patient or Public Contribution
During the development of the study protocol, meetings with user representatives were held.
Over the last decades, many high-income countries have successfully implemented assertive outreach mental health services for acute care. Despite evidence that these services entail several benefits ...for service users, Germany has lagged behind and has been slow in implementing outreach services. In 2018, a new law enabled national mental health care providers to implement team-based crisis intervention services on a regular basis, allowing for different forms of Inpatient Equivalent Home Treatment (IEHT). IEHT is similar to the internationally known Home Treatment or Crisis Resolution Teams. It provides acute psychiatric treatment at the user's home, similar to inpatient hospital treatment in terms of content, flexibility, and complexity.
The presented naturalistic, quasi-experimental cohort study will evaluate IEHT in ten hospitals running IEHT services in different German regions. Within a multi-method research approach, it will evaluate stakeholders' experiences of care, service use, efficacy, costs, treatment processes and implementation processes of IEHT from different perspectives. Quantitative surveys will be used to recruit 360 service users. Subsequently, 180 service users receiving IEHT will be compared with 180 matched statistical 'twins' receiving standard inpatient treatment. Assessments will take place at baseline as well as after 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is the hospital re-admission rate within 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the combined readmission rate, total number of inpatient hospital days, treatment discontinuation rate, quality of life, psycho-social functioning, job integration, recovery, satisfaction with care, shared decision-making, and treatment costs. Additionally, the study will assess the burden of care and satisfaction with care among relatives or informal caregivers. A collaborative research team made up of researchers with and without lived experience of mental distress will conduct qualitative investigations with service users, caregivers and IEHT staff teams to explore critical ingredients and interactions between implementation processes, treatment processes, and outcomes from a stakeholder perspective.
By integrating outcome, process and implementation research as well as different stakeholder perspectives and experiences in one study, this trial captures the various facets of IEHT as a special form of home treatment. Therefore, it allows for an adequate, comprehensive evaluation on different levels of this complex intervention.
Trial registrations: 1) German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS000224769. Registered December 3rd 2020, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/setLocale_EN.do ; 2) ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT0474550 . Registered February 9th 2021.
Background
Shared decision making (SDM) in mental health may contribute to greater patient satisfaction and is sometimes associated with better health outcomes. Here, SDM should not only involve ...service users and clinicians but also involve the service users' caregivers.
Aim
This study aimed to achieve better insight into the current SDM patterns of triads of service users, caregivers and clinicians in inpatient mental health care and the three parties' expectations towards the prospects of triadic SDM.
Design
The current research uses data from a representative cross‐sectional study on caregivers in psychiatric inpatient treatment. We analysed data on n = 94 triads of service users, their caregivers and their clinicians.
Results
All three parties acknowledge caregivers to be of great support to monitor the progress with mental disease. The caregiver's role during consultations is most often described as being an expert, receiving or providing information and supporting service users. However, caregivers at times try to seek support for themselves during caregiver‐clinician interaction, or their behaviour was described as unhelpful. The potential prospects of caregiver involvement are clearly acknowledged despite the low implementation of caregiver involvement in this sample (only in one‐third of the cases).
Conclusion
Triadic SDM rarely takes place in routine inpatient care. First, there should be a focus on interventions aiming at inviting caregivers to consultations. Only in the second step should a better conceptualisation of triadic SDM be undertaken.
Public Contribution
Early results were discussed with a local peer support group for caregivers of individuals living with mental illness.
Despite the widespread use of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the clinical meaning of its total score and cut-off values used to define treatment response are unclear.
To link the BPRS to ...Clinical Global Impression (CGI) ratings.
Equipercentile linking of BPRS and CGI ratings from seven drug trials in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia (n=1979).
'Mildly ill' according to the CGI approximately corresponded to a BPRS total score of 31, 'moderately ill'to a BPRS score of 41 and'markedly ill'to a BPRS score of 53.'Minimally improved'according to the CGI score was associated with percentage BPRS reductions of 24, 27 and 30% at weeks 1, 2 and 4, respectively. The corresponding numbers for a CGI rating of 'much improved' were 44, 53 and 58%.
The results provide a clearer understanding of how to interpret BPRS total and percentage reduction scores in clinical trials with patients acutely ill with schizophrenia who are experiencing positive symptoms.
Psychiatric disorders are increasing globally. Especially when these disorders affect working people, this places a financial burden on society due to long-term sick leave, the incapacity to work and ...the inability to earn and pay taxes. General practitioners (GPs) are often the first health professionals to be consulted by those suffering from mental health disorders. This study investigated the experiences of GPs regarding their patients with mental health disorders and identified factors that are important for a successful return to work.
This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to explore the opinions of GPs (n = 12) working in Munich, Germany, or its metropolitan area. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the reflexive thematic analysis method.
GPs think of themselves as important players in the rehabilitation process of patients with mental health disorders. In their daily routine, they face many obstacles to ensure the best treatment and outcome for their patients. They also suffer from poor collaboration with other stakeholders, such as psychiatric hospitals, therapists or employers. They indicate that the mental health disorder of each patient is unique, including the barriers to and possibilities of a successful return to work. Additionally, the workplace appears to play a crucial role in the success rate of re-entry into work. It can exacerbate the course of mental health disorders or support recovery. Fear, shame and stigmatization of the patients are personal factors responsible for prolonged sick leave.
We conclude that GPs believe that they can have a major impact on the rehabilitation of patients with mental health disorders. As such, special focus should be placed on supporting them in this context.
The present study aimed at answering three research questions: (a) Does shared decision making (SDM) yield similar effects for patients with involuntary admission or incidents of aggression compared ...to patients with voluntary admission or without incidents of aggression? (b) Does SDM reduce the number of patients with incidents of aggression and the use of coercive measures? (c) Does the use of coercion have a negative impact on patients' perceived involvement in decision making?
We used data from the cluster-randomized SDM-PLUS trial in which patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in 12 acute psychiatric wards of 4 German psychiatric hospitals either received an SDM-intervention or treatment as usual. In addition, data on aggression and coercive measures were retrospectively obtained from patients' records.
The analysis included n = 305 inpatients. Patient aggression as well as coercive measures mostly took place in the first days of the inpatient stay and were seldom during the study phase of the SDM-PLUS trial.Patients who had been admitted involuntarily or showed incidents of aggression profited similarly from the intervention with regard to perceived involvement, adherence, and treatment satisfaction compared to patients admitted voluntarily or without incidents of aggression. The intervention showed no effect on patient aggression and coercive measures. Having previously experienced coercive measures did not predict patients' rating of perceived involvement.
Further research should focus on SDM-interventions taking place in the very first days of inpatients treatment and potential beneficial long effects of participatory approaches that may not be measurable during the current inpatient stay.
Compliance with antipsychotic medication is a major issue in schizophrenia treatment, and noncompliance with antipsychotic treatment is closely related to relapse and rehospitalization. An enhanced ...involvement of patients with schizophrenia in treatment decisions ("shared decision making") is expected to improve long-term compliance and reduce rehospitalizations. The aim of the present analysis was to study whether shared decision making (SDM) in antipsychotic drug choice would influence long-term outcome.
From February 2003 to January 2004, psychiatric state hospital inpatients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia (ICD-10; N = 107) were recruited for the trial using a cluster-randomized controlled design. An SDM program on antipsychotic drug choice consisting of a decision aid and a planning talk between patient and physician was compared with routine care with respect to long-term compliance and rehospitalizations (6-month and 18-month follow-up).
On the whole, we found high rates of noncompliance and rehospitalization. There were no differences between intervention and control groups in the univariate analyses. However, when controlling for confounding factors in a multivariate analysis, there was a positive trend (p = .08) that patients in the SDM intervention had fewer rehospitalizations. Additionally, a higher desire of the patient for autonomy and better knowledge at discharge were associated with higher hospitalization rates.
The intervention studied showed a positive trend but no clear beneficial effect on long-term outcomes. A more thorough implementation of SDM (e.g., iterative administration of decision aid) might yield larger effects. Those patients with higher participation preferences are at higher risk for poor treatment outcomes and therefore require special attention. Strategies to match these patients' needs might improve compliance and long-term outcomes.
PDF
