Purpose: Mobile health (mHealth) solutions have become an inevitable element of the healthcare landscape. The recommendation and use of mHealth is important, but it is often underutilised. This study was conducted in England. It aimed to determine the use and recommendation of mHealth apps by pharmacists, the public’s perceptions of mHealth apps in general, and the awareness and use of health apps by diabetic patients in particular. Methods: The study used a mixed research approach, utilising a sequence of survey-based questionnaires with pharmacists and the general public, followed by semi-structured interviews with diabetic patients. Results: Pharmacists’ questionnaires revealed that 56% of the respondents were aware of health apps, 60% of which recommended them to patients. Over 76% of the individuals owned a smartphone. The types of applications that saw the most use from the general public were health and lifestyle apps (24%), social apps (19%), followed by news (18%). Although eight out of nine diabetic patients owned a smartphone, only three used diabetes apps. Diabetic patients also suggested an interest in using diabetes apps to aid in optimising care via the utilisation of visual aids, reminders, recording patient data, social coaching, and remote collaboration with healthcare professionals (HCPs), but time was seen as the biggest obstacle to using a diabetes mHealth application. Conclusion: Despite the growing number of mHealth apps, the level of awareness and usability of such apps by patients and pharmacists was still relatively low. Nevertheless, the majority who used health apps found them to be beneficial, and the public agreed that it helped them to live a healthier lifestyle. Therefore, health apps have great potential in health promotion. Pharmacists are ideally placed to promote them and make patients more aware of them. To increase the use of these apps, it is necessary to first increase awareness and knowledge of these apps, both to the public and to healthcare professionals.

There is a growing emphasis in the field of psychiatry on the need to identify candidate biomarkers to aid in diagnosis and clinical management of depression, particularly with respect to predicting response to specific therapeutic strategies. MicroRNAs are small nucleotide sequences with the ability to regulate gene expression at the transcriptomic level and emerging evidence from a range of studies has highlighted their biomarker potential. Here we compared healthy controls (n=20) with patients diagnosed with major depression (n=40) and who were treatment-resistant to identify peripheral microRNA biomarkers, which could be used for diagnosis and to predict response to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and ketamine (KET) infusions, treatments that have previously shown to be effective in treatment-resistant depression (TRD). At baseline and after treatment, blood samples were taken and symptom severity scores rated using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). Samples were analyzed for microRNA expression using microarray and validated using quantitative PCR. As expected, both treatments reduced HDRS scores. Compared with controls, the baseline expression of the microRNA let-7b was less by ~40% in TRD patients compared with controls. The baseline expression of let-7c was also lower by ~50% in TRD patients who received ECT. Bioinformatic analysis revealed that let-7b and let-7c regulates the expression of 27 genes in the PI3k-Akt-mTOR signaling pathway, which has previously been reported to be dysfunctional in depression. The expression of miR-16, miR-182, miR-451 and miR-223 were similar to that in controls. Baseline microRNA expression could not predict treatment response and microRNAs were unaffected by treatment. Taken together, we have identified let-7b and let-7c as candidate biomarkers of major depression.

No abstract

Corticosteroids are a central part of many cancer treatment regimens. Neuropsychiatric toxicity has complicated their use, including an association with a spectrum of symptoms, from insomnia, cognitive impairment and mood symptoms, to severe mental disorders, including mania, psychosis and severe depression. Although steroid-induced mental disorders were first reported in medicine more than 60 years ago, there is a dearth of evidence available to date on optimal treatment and prevention to guide cancer clinicians. We completed a systematic review of the current evidence for therapeutic and prophylactic interventions of steroid-induced mental disorders in cancer. We searched Medline, Embase and PsycINFO and selected studies related to steroid-induced mental disorder. The studies found were limited to case series and case reports only.