No abstract

People living with serious mental illness (SMI) have shorter life expectancies than the general population. We examined how contextual factors influence the physical health of this population. We conducted interviews, focus groups, and participant observations with stakeholders from six behavioral health organizations. We found that consumers’ avoidance of overt disagreement during medical visits, their mistrust of medical institutions, and cultural variations in body image influenced the clinical encounter. Mental health providers’ ambivalence about intervening in consumers’ physical health, primary care providers’ misattribution of physical symptoms to mental disorders, and providers’ stigmatization of consumers shaped clinical encounters. Consumers’ diets were shaped by food environments and social norms associated with traditional diets. Internal and external factors impacted consumers’ physical activity. In this article, we illustrate the importance of considering contextual factors in the development and implementation of interventions aimed at improving the physical health of people with SMI.

BackgroundVentilator-associated respiratory infections (tracheobronchitis, pneumonia) contribute significant morbidity and mortality to adults receiving care in intensive care units (ICU). Administration of broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics, the current standard of care, may have systemic adverse effects. The efficacy of aerosolized antibiotics for treatment of ventilator-associated respiratory infections remains unclear. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the efficacy of aerosolized antibiotics in the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and tracheobronchitis (VAT), using the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines.MethodsWe conducted a search of three databases (PubMed, Web of Knowledge and the Cochrane Collaboration) for randomized, controlled trials studying the use of nebulized antibiotics in VAP and VAT that measured clinical cure (e.g., change in Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score) as an outcome measurement. We augmented the electronic searches with hand searches of the references for any narrative review articles as well as any article included in the systematic review. Included studies were examined for risk of bias using the Cochrane Handbook’s “Risk of Bias” assessment tool.ResultsSix studies met full inclusion criteria. For the systemic review’s primary outcome (clinical cure), two studies found clinically and statistically significant improvements in measures of VAP cure while four found no statistically significant difference in measurements of cure. No studies found inferiority of aerosolized antibiotics. The included studies had various degrees of biases, particularly in the performance and detection bias domains. Given that outcome measures of clinical cure were not uniform, we were unable to conduct a meta-analysis.ConclusionsThere is insufficient evidence for the use of inhaled antibiotic therapy as primary or adjuvant treatment of VAP or VAT. Additional, better-powered randomized-controlled trials are needed to assess the efficacy of inhaled antibiotic therapy for VAP and VAT.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12890-016-0202-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract