Abstract. Background: Infectious disease-related public health emergencies (epidemics) may increase suicide risk, and high-quality evidence is needed to guide an international response. Aims: We investigated the potential impacts of epidemics on suicide-related outcomes. Method: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, PsyArXiv, medRxiv, and bioRxiv from inception to May 13–16, 2020. Inclusion criteria: primary studies, reviews, and meta-analyses; reporting the impact of epidemics; with a primary outcome of suicide, suicidal behavior, suicidal ideation, and/or self-harm. Exclusion criteria: not concerned with suicide-related outcomes; not suitable for data extraction. PROSPERO registration: #CRD42020187013. Results: Eight primary papers were included, examining the effects of five epidemics on suicide-related outcomes. There was evidence of increased suicide rates among older adults during SARS and in the year following the epidemic (possibly motivated by social disconnectedness, fears of virus infection, and concern about burdening others) and associations between SARS/Ebola exposure and increased suicide attempts. A preprint study reported associations between COVID-19 distress and past-month suicidal ideation. Limitations: Few studies have investigated the topic; these are of relatively low methodological quality. Conclusion: Findings support an association between previous epidemics and increased risk of suicide-related outcomes. Research is needed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on suicide outcomes.

This study demonstrated that transfer into the community from an institutional environment was associated with long-term improvements in quality of life and social functioning, even in those who spent many years in the institution. Those who demonstrated the greatest improvement in QoL had less social behavioural problems at baseline assessment, providing further evidence of the success of community living for former long-stay patients.

Background Patients who present to emergency departments after intentional self-harm are at an increased risk of dying by suicide. This applies particularly to men, who represent nearly two-thirds of those who die by suicide in Ontario. One way of potentially addressing this gap is to offer a course of blended problem-solving therapy, comprised of a brief course of evidence-based psychotherapy for individuals at risk for suicide, facilitated by the use of a patient-facing smartphone application and a clinician-facing “dashboard.” This approach has the potential to combine the benefits of face-to-face therapy and technology to create a novel intervention. Methods This is a cohort study nested within a larger pragmatic multicentre pre- and post-design cluster randomised trial. Suicidal ideation assessed by the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation is the primary outcome variable. Secondary outcome measures include depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale), post-traumatic stress disorder (Primary Care PTSD Screen), health-related quality of life (EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level questionnaire), meaning in life (Experienced Meaning in Life Scale), perceived social supports (Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support), alcohol use (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test), drug use (Drug Abuse Screening Test Short Form 10), problem-solving skills (Social Problem-Solving Inventory–Revised Short Form), and self-reported healthcare costs, as well as health service use measured using Ontario administrative health data. A process evaluation will also be conducted following study completion. Discussion The cohort study will test whether better adherence to the intervention results in better outcomes. The value of the cohort study design is that we can examine in more detail certain subgroups or other variables that are not available in the larger cluster randomised trial. This trial will aim to improve standards by informing best practice in management of men who self-harm and present to hospitals in Ontario. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03473535. Registered on March 22, 2018.

Background: Patients who present to Emergency Departments (ED) after intentional self-harm are at an increased risk of dying by suicide. This applies particularly to men, who represent nearly two-thirds of those who die by suicide in Ontario. One way of potentially addressing this gap is to offer a course of blended problem-solving therapy (PST), comprised of a brief course of evidence-based psychotherapy for individuals at-risk for suicide, facilitated by the use of a patient-facing smartphone application and a clinician-facing "dashboard". This approach has the potential to combine the benefits of face to face therapy and technology to create a novel intervention.Methods: This is a cohort study, nested within a larger pragmatic multicentre pre-and post-design cluster randomized trial (cRCT). Suicidal ideas assessed by the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (BSS) is the primary outcome variable. Secondary outcome measures include: depression (PHQ-9); anxiety (GAD-7); PTSD (PC-PTSD); health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L); meaning in life (EMIL); perceived social supports (MSPSS); alcohol use (AUDIT); drug use (DAST-10); problem-solving skills (SPSI-R:S); self-reported health care costs; and, health service use measured using Ontario administrative health data. A process evaluation will also be conducted following study completion. Discussion:The cohort study will test whether better adherence to the intervention results in better outcomes. The value of the cohort study design is that we can examine in more detail certain subgroups or other variables that are not available in the larger cluster randomised trial. This trial will aim to improve standards by informing best practice in management of men who self-harm and present to hospitals in Ontario. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03473535, Registered on March 22, 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03473535

ObjectivesThe goals of this study are to identify and analyse interventions that aim to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD in people who are vulnerably housed and to describe how these treatments have been delivered using trauma-informed care.DesignScoping review.Search strategyWe searched electronic databases including MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and PTSDpubs for published literature up to November 2021 for any studies that examined the treatment of PTSD in adults who were vulnerably housed. Websites of relevant organisations and other grey literature sources were searched to supplement the electronic database search. The characteristics and effect of the interventions were analysed. We also explored how the interventions were delivered and the elements of trauma-informed care that were described.Results28 studies were included. We identified four types of interventions: (1) trauma focused psychotherapies; (2) non-trauma psychotherapies; (3) housing interventions and (4) pharmacotherapies. The trauma-informed interventions were small case series and the non-trauma focused therapies included four randomised controlled trials, were generally ineffective. Of the 10 studies which described trauma-informed care the most commonly named elements were physical and emotional safety, the experience of feeling heard and understood, and flexibility of choice. The literature also commented on the difficulty of providing care to this population including lack of private space to deliver therapy; the co-occurrence of substance use; and barriers to follow-up including limited length of stay in different shelters and high staff turnover.ConclusionsThis scoping review identified a lack of high-quality trials to address PTSD in people who are vulnerably housed. There is a need to conduct well designed trials that take into account the unique setting of this population and which describe those elements of trauma-informed care that are most important and necessary.

Background As of May 2022, Ontario has seen more than 1.3 million cases of COVID-19. While the majority of individuals will recover from infection within 4 weeks, a significant subset experience persistent and often debilitating symptoms, known as “post-COVID syndrome” or “Long COVID.” Those with Long COVID experience a wide array of symptoms, with variable severity, including fatigue, cognitive impairment, and shortness of breath. Further, the prevalence and duration of Long COVID is not clear, nor is there evidence on the best course of rehabilitation for individuals to return to their desired level of function. Previous work with chronic conditions has suggested that the addition of electronic case management (ECM) may help to improve outcomes. These platforms provide enhanced connection with care providers, detailed symptom tracking and goal setting, and access to relevant resources. In this study, our primary aim is to determine if the addition of ECM with health coaching improves Long COVID outcomes at 3 months compared to health coaching alone. Methods The trial is an open-label, single-site, randomized controlled trial of ECM with health coaching (ECM+) compared to health coaching alone (HC). Both groups will continue to receive usual care. Participants will be randomized equally to receive health coaching (± ECM) for a period of 8 weeks and a 12-week follow-up. Our primary outcome is the WHO Disability Assessment Scale (WHODAS), 36-item self-report total score. Participants will also complete measures of cognition, fatigue, breathlessness, and mental health. Participants and care providers will be asked to complete a brief qualitative interview at the end of the study to evaluate acceptability and implementation of the intervention. Discussion There is currently little evidence about the optimal treatment of Long COVID patients or the use of digital health platforms in this population. The results of this trial could result in rapid, scalable, and personalized care for people with Long COVID which will decrease morbidity after an acute infection. Results from this study will also inform decision making in Long COVID and treatment guidelines at provincial and national levels. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05019963. Registered on 25 August 2021.

Brexpiprazole, a novel atypical antipsychotic agent, has recently been approved as an adjunctive treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) when monotherapy only provides a partial response. The mechanism of action is likely related to its partial agonist activity at D 2 and 5-HT 1A receptors, as well as potent 5-HT 2A antagonist effects. The purpose of this systematic review is to provide a detailed overview available evidence on its role in treating MDD, based on all clinical publications in the English language between January 1, 2014 and April 30, 2017 identified from PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two primary pivotal trials are reviewed in detail and a further 10 supporting reviews and open-label studies are discussed. Brexpiprazole is compared with aripiprazole according to pharmacologic and clinical activities. Overall, this appears to be a useful antidepressant adjunctive therapy with a favorable side effect profile and comparable efficacy with existing agents.

No abstract