Objective To examine the effects of involving patients in the planning and development of health care. Data sources Published and grey literature. Study selection Systematic search for worldwide reports written in English between January 1966 and October 2000. Data extraction Qualitative review of papers describing the effects of involving patients in the planning and development of health care. Results Of 42 papers identified, 31 (74%) were case studies. Papers often described changes to services that were attributed to involving patients, including attempts to make services more accessible and producing information leaflets for patients. Changes in the attitudes of organisations to involving patients and positive responses from patients who took part in initiatives were also reported. Conclusions Evidence supports the notion that involving patients has contributed to changes in the provision of services across a range of different settings. An evidence base for the effects on use of services, quality of care, satisfaction, or health of patients does not exist.

No abstract

Background

The nomenclature of personality disorders in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems represents the most radical change in the classification history of personality disorders. A dimensional structure now replaces categorical description. It was argued by the Working Group that only a dimensional system was consistent with the empirical evidence and, in the spirit of clinical utility, the new system is based on two steps. The first step is to assign one of five levels of severity, and the second step is to assign up to five prominent domain traits. There was resistance to this structure from those who feel that categorical diagnosis, particularly of borderline personality disorder, should be retained. After lengthy discussion, described in detail here, there is now an option for a borderline pattern descriptor to be selected as a diagnostic option after severity has been determined.

Findings of the present meta-analysis indicate that music therapy provides short-term beneficial effects for people with depression. Music therapy added to treatment as usual (TAU) seems to improve depressive symptoms compared with TAU alone. Additionally, music therapy plus TAU is not associated with more or fewer adverse events than TAU alone. Music therapy also shows efficacy in decreasing anxiety levels and improving functioning of depressed individuals.Future trials based on adequate design and larger samples of children and adolescents are needed to consolidate our findings. Researchers should consider investigating mechanisms of music therapy for depression. It is important to clearly describe music therapy, TAU, the comparator condition, and the profession of the person who delivers the intervention, for reproducibility and comparison purposes.

The population mean score in 4164 subjects was 4.6 and the data from all studies suggested that a score of 10 or more indicated poor social functioning. Those presenting as psychiatric emergencies had the poorest social function (mean 11.4) and psychiatric patients from general practice the best function (mean 7.7) of the clinical populations. The eight item scores had a normal distribution in psychiatric populations and a skewed one in a normal population; scores were relatively stable over the short (weeks) and long-term (months), and were high in the presence of acute mental health disturbance and personality disorder, giving support to the validity of the scale. The results from a UK sample of a randomly selected population specifically weighted for ethnic minorities showed similar social function across groups.

No abstract

Nineteen years have elapsed since the 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD‐10), and many advances have been made in the field of personality disorders since that time. This paper reflects these advances and presents the first proposals of the ICD‐11 working group for the reclassification of personality disorders. The essential changes from ICD‐10 are to make the primary classification of personality disorder one of five levels of severity, including one of personality difficulty below the severity of disorder, to replace the existing categories of personality disorder with five monothetic trait domains of asocial, emotionally unstable, obsessional (anankastic), anxious/dependent and dissocial groups and to provide a simple algorithm for classification that can be used in ordinary psychiatric practice. It is argued that the proposed changes will improve the clinical utility of the diagnosis of personality disorder, reduce its stigma and help in the development and selection of appropriate treatment. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.