Background Eating disorders (EDs) are serious psychiatric illnesses that have high rates of morbidity and mortality, and low long-term recovery rates. Peer mentor programs (PMPs) have been associated with reduced psychiatric hospitalisation and shorter lengths of stay for those with other severe mental illnesses. The present study evaluated the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a PMP for individuals with EDs in improving symptomatology and quality of life. Methods Thirty mentees and seventeen mentors were recruited. The PMP involved thirteen sessions over 6 months. Participants completed measures assessing ED symptomatology, quality of life (QoL), mood and perceived disability. Changes in symptomatology before and after the PMP were tested by Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Semi-structured interviews were conducted for qualitative evaluation of the PMP. Results The program was deemed to have moderate feasibility with eight of 30 mentees, and two of 17 mentors withdrawing. Completion rates ranged from 2 to 16 sessions, and between 3 and 45 weeks. Mentees demonstrated improvements in body mass index, QoL, ED symptomatology, mood (depression, anxiety and tension/stress) and perceived disability from pre- to post-program. Mentors demonstrated significant increases in ED symptomatology, but no worsening of QoL, mood or perceived disability. Qualitative findings from both mentees and mentors were positive: emergent themes included hope for recovery, a sense of agency and inspiration gained from interaction with someone with lived experience of an ED. Conclusions This pilot study suggests feasibility of the PMP for individuals with EDs. Mentees demonstrated improvements in ED symptomatology, QoL, mood and perceived disability. However, the increase in ED symptomatology reported by the mentors over the PMP highlights potential risks and the need for thorough monitoring while preliminary evaluation is undertaken. The mentoring relationship was a positive experience for both mentees and mentors, instilling an increased hope for recovery in mentees and an opportunity for mentors to reflect on their own recovery with increased confidence. The novel relationship formed throughout mentorship highlights a potential gap in current clinical support services, which warrants further exploration within a controlled trial. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registration Number: ACTRN12617001412325. Retrospectively registered: 05/10/2017. Date of first enrolment: 20/01/2017. https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=373741&isReview=true Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40337-019-0245-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Background: After receiving intensive medical treatment; individuals with eating disorders often require ongoing care to maintain their recovery, build social networks, and reduce risk of relapse. Methods: To address this important transition period, a six-month peer mentoring program was developed and piloted in Melbourne, Australia. Twelve adults with a past history of an eating disorder (mentors) were paired with 14 individuals with a current eating disorder (mentees). Pairs met for thirteen mentoring sessions in community settings. Throughout the program mentees and mentors completed reflective questions online. Upon completion of the program, qualitative interviews were conducted. Both online reflections and interviews explored themes relating to perceived benefits and challenges of participation in the peer mentoring program, and the differences between mentoring and traditional treatment.Results: Thematic analysis identified several benefits for mentees; including hope, reconnection with others, and reengaging with the world. The majority of mentees described their mentor as uniquely supportive due to their past experience of an eating disorder. Mentors reported experiencing benefits such as increased connection with self and others, and indicated that the experience helped them positively reframe their past experience of an eating disorder. Ending the relationship at the completion of the program was a significant challenge for both groups, and managing boundaries was deemed a main challenge by mentors.Conclusions: Overall, results indicated that this mode of informal support may be worthy of further investigation as an adjunct to clinical treatment programs for this population. Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials registration number -ACTRN12617001412325 -Date of registration -05/10/2017 (Retrospectively registered)

BackgroundEating disorders are serious psychiatric illnesses that are often associated with poor quality of life and low long-term recovery rates. Peer mentor programs have been found to improve psychiatric symptoms and quality of life in other mental illnesses, and a small number of studies have suggested that eating disorder patients may benefit from such programs. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of a peer mentor program for individuals with eating disorders in terms of improving symptomatology and quality of life.MethodsUp to 30 individuals with a past history of an eating disorder will be recruited to mentor 30 individuals with a current eating disorder. Mentoring will involve 13 sessions (held approximately every 2 weeks), of up to 3 h each, over 6 months.DiscussionThis pilot proof-of-concept feasibility study will inform the efficacy of a peer mentoring program on improving eating disorder symptomatology and quality of life, and will inform future randomised controlled trials.Trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registration Number: ACTRN12617001412325. The date of registration (retrospective): 05/10/2017.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-018-0268-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Background/Aims National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) impact reports review how NICE recommendations for evidence-based and cost-effective care are being used in priority areas of the health and care system. Musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, including arthritis, affect over 20 million people in the UK, and represent a significant burden of ill health, both to the individual and the wider healthcare system. This report summarises the progress made by the healthcare system in England towards implementing NICE’s suite of guidance on arthritis. Methods Published data collected from national audits, reports, surveys, journals and indicator frameworks was reviewed to provide insight on the uptake and impact of NICE’s recommendations and quality standards on osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis. Stakeholders were engaged to provide expert advice and an understanding of real-world experiences and working practices. A report was produced, including examples of NICE guidance in practice, patient quotes and outcomes data, alongside uptake data. The report highlights implementation gaps and considers what NICE will do next to support the system to improve uptake in these areas. Results Data were presented, focusing on the following topic areas: diagnosis and management of osteoarthritis, referral and diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis, and management of inflammatory arthritis. The report highlights areas of high uptake: significant progress has been made in reducing the number of unnecessary knee arthroscopies for people with osteoarthritis; Improvements are being made towards achieving rheumatology referral targets for people with suspected inflammatory arthritis, as well as ensuring pharmacological treatment is started promptly. There is an ongoing transition to the use of biosimilar drugs as a cost-saving measure. This has reduced rheumatology drug spend by over £80 million between 2017 and 2019;. There is high provision of education and support for people with arthritis, including access to specialist advice to manage flares. The report also highlights areas where there are gaps in implementation: there is a need for improved data collection on the diagnosis and management of osteoarthritis in primary care. There is a need for the increased provision of pre- and post-surgical physiotherapy and rehabilitation for people having joint surgery. There are severe delays in the referral and diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis, highlighting the need to raise awareness of the condition in primary care, and in other specialist secondary care areas. There is a need to improve access to psychological services for people living with a long-term physical health condition. Conclusion Arthritis remains one of the most significant causes of disability in the UK. Evaluating the uptake of evidence-based guidance and improving implementation is central to improving outcomes. Throughout this report, we have identified areas of high and low uptake of NICE guidance and will work closely with stakeholders to address gaps in implementation. Disclosure J. Wray: None. J. Beveridge: None. V. Carter: None.