Background: Co-occurring mental health/psychiatric conditions (CMHCs) are common in autism, impeding quality of life. Reported prevalence rates range widely. Better prevalence estimates and identification of moderators are needed to enhance recognition and care, and to guide future research. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA and MOOSE standards (pre-registered protocol:

BackgroundInterest in the well-being of physicians has increased because of their contributions to the healthcare system quality. There is growing recognition that physicians are exposed to workplace factors that increase the risk of work stress. Long-term exposure to high work stress can result in burnout. Reports from around the world suggest that about one-third to one-half of physicians experience burnout. Understanding the outcomes associated with burnout is critical to understanding its affects on the healthcare system. Productivity outcomes are among those that could have the most immediate effects on the healthcare system. This systematic literature review is one of the first to explore the evidence for the types of physician productivity outcomes associated with physician burnout. It answers the question, “How does burnout affect physician productivity?”MethodsA systematic search was performed of: Medline Current, Medline in process, PsycInfo, Embase and Web of Science. The search period covered 2002 to 2012. The searches identified articles about practicing physicians working in civilian settings. Articles that primarily looked only at residents or medical students were excluded. Productivity was captured by hours worked, patients seen, sick leave, leaving the profession, retirement, workload and presenteeism. Studies also were excluded if: (1) the study sample was not comprised of at least 50% physicians, (2) the study did not examine the relationship between burnout and productivity or (3) a validated measure of burnout was not used.ResultsThe search identified 870 unique citations; 5 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. This review indicates that globally there is recognition of the potential impact of physician burnout on productivity. Productivity was examined using: number of sick leave days, work ability, intent to either continue practicing or change jobs. The majority of the studies indicate there is a negative relationship between burnout and productivity. However, there is variation depending on the type of productivity outcome examined.ConclusionsThere is evidence that burnout is associated with decreased productivity. However, this line of inquiry is still developing. A number of gaps are yet to be filled including understanding how to quantify the changes in productivity related to burnout.

ObjectivesThis study reviews the current state of the published peer-reviewed literature related to physician burnout and two quality of care dimensions. The purpose of this systematic literature review is to address the question, ‘How does physician burnout affect the quality of healthcare related to the dimensions of acceptability and safety?’DesignUsing a multiphase screening process, this systematic literature review is based on publically available peer-reviewed studies published between 2002 and 2017. Six electronic databases were searched: (1) MEDLINE Current, (2) MEDLINE In-process, (3) MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, (4) PsycINFO, (5) Embase and (6) Web of Science.SettingPhysicians practicing in civilian settings.ParticipantsPracticing physicians who have completed training.Primary and secondary outcome measuresQuality of healthcare related to acceptability (ie, patient satisfaction, physician communication and physician attitudes) and safety (ie, minimising risks or harm to patients).Results4114 unique citations were identified. Of these, 12 articles were included in the review. Two studies were rated as having high risk of bias and 10 as having moderate risk. Four studies were conducted in North America, four in Europe, one in the Middle East and three in East Asia. Results of this systematic literature review suggest there is moderate evidence that burnout is associated with safety-related quality of care. Because of the variability in the way patient acceptability-related quality of care was measured and the inconsistency in study findings, the evidence supporting the relationship between burnout and patient acceptability-related quality of care is less strong.ConclusionsThe focus on direct care-related quality highlights additional ways that physician burnout affects the healthcare system. These studies can help to inform decisions about how to improve patient care by addressing physician burnout. Continued work looking at the relationship between dimensions of acceptability-related quality of care measures and burnout is needed to advance the field.

BackgroundIn adult correctional facilities, correctional officers (COs) are responsible for the safety and security of the facility in addition to aiding in offender rehabilitation and preventing recidivism. COs experience higher rates of job stress and burnout that stem from organizational stressors, leading to negative outcomes for not only the CO but the organization as well. Effective interventions could aim at targeting organizational stressors in order to reduce these negative outcomes as well as COs’ job stress and burnout. This paper fills a gap in the organizational stress literature among COs by systematically reviewing the relationship between organizational stressors and CO stress and burnout in adult correctional facilities. In doing so, the present review identifies areas that organizational interventions can target in order to reduce CO job stress and burnout.MethodsA systematic search of the literature was conducted using Medline, PsycINFO, Criminal Justice Abstracts, and Sociological Abstracts. All retrieved articles were independently screened based on criteria developed a priori. All included articles underwent quality assessment. Organizational stressors were categorized according to Cooper and Marshall’s (1976) model of job stress.ResultsThe systematic review yielded 8 studies that met all inclusion and quality assessment criteria. The five categories of organizational stressors among correctional officers are: stressors intrinsic to the job, role in the organization, rewards at work, supervisory relationships at work and the organizational structure and climate. The organizational structure and climate was demonstrated to have the most consistent relationship with CO job stress and burnout.ConclusionsThe results of this review indicate that the organizational structure and climate of correctional institutions has the most consistent relationship with COs’ job stress and burnout. Limitations of the studies reviewed include the cross-sectional design and the use of varying measures for organizational stressors. The results of this review indicate that interventions should aim to improve the organizational structure and climate of the correctional facility by improving communication between management and COs.

BackgroundWorldwide opioid-related overdose has become a major public health crisis. People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are overrepresented in the criminal justice system and at higher risk for opioid-related mortality. However, correctional facilities frequently adopt an abstinence-only approach, seldom offering the gold standard opioid agonist treatment (OAT) to incarcerated persons with OUD. In an attempt to inform adequate management of OUD among incarcerated persons, we conducted a systematic review of opioid-related interventions delivered before, during, and after incarceration.Methods and findingsWe systematically reviewed 8 electronic databases for original, peer-reviewed literature published between January 2008 and October 2019. Our review included studies conducted among adult participants with OUD who were incarcerated or recently released into the community (≤90 days post-incarceration). The search identified 2,356 articles, 46 of which met the inclusion criteria based on assessments by 2 independent reviewers. Thirty studies were conducted in North America, 9 in Europe, and 7 in Asia/Oceania. The systematic review included 22 randomized control trials (RCTs), 3 non-randomized clinical trials, and 21 observational studies. Eight observational studies utilized administrative data and included large sample sizes (median of 10,419 [range 2273–131,472] participants), and 13 observational studies utilized primary data, with a median of 140 (range 27–960) participants. RCTs and non-randomized clinical trials included a median of 198 (range 15–1,557) and 44 (range 27–382) participants, respectively. Twelve studies included only men, 1 study included only women, and in the remaining 33 studies, the percentage of women was below 30%. The majority of study participants were middle-aged adults (36–55 years). Participants treated at a correctional facility with methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) or buprenorphine (BPN)/naloxone (NLX) had lower rates of illicit opioid use, had higher adherence to OUD treatment, were less likely to be re-incarcerated, and were more likely to be working 1 year post-incarceration. Participants who received MMT or BPN/NLX while incarcerated had fewer nonfatal overdoses and lower mortality. The main limitation of our systematic review is the high heterogeneity of studies (different designs, settings, populations, treatments, and outcomes), precluding a meta-analysis. Other study limitations include the insufficient data about incarcerated women with OUD, and the lack of information about incarcerated populations with OUD who are not included in published research.ConclusionsIn this carefully conducted systematic review, we found that correctional facilities should scale up OAT among incarcerated persons with OUD. The strategy is likely to decrease opioid-related overdose and mortality, reduce opioid use and other risky behaviors during and after incarceration, and improve retention in addiction treatment after prison release. Immediate OAT after prison release and additional prev...

BackgroundThere has been increasing interest in examining the relationship between physician wellbeing and quality of patient care. However, few reviews have specifically focused on resident burnout and quality of patient care. The purpose of this systematic literature review of the current scientific literature is to address the question, “How does resident burnout affect the quality of healthcare related to the dimensions of acceptability and safety?”MethodsThis systematic literature review uses a multi-step screening process of publicly available peer-reviewed studies from five electronic databases: (1) Medline Current, (2) Medline In-process, (3) PsycINFO, (4) Embase, and (5) Web of Science.ResultsThe electronic literature search resulted in the identification of 4638 unique citations. Of these, 10 articles were included in the review. Studies were assessed for risk of bias. Of the 10 studies that met the inclusion criteria, eight were conducted in the US, one in The Netherlands, and one in Mexico. Eight of the 10 studies focused on patient safety. The results of these included studies suggest there is moderate evidence that burnout is associated with patient safety (i.e., resident self-perceived medical errors and sub-optimal care). There is less evidence that specific dimensions of burnout are related to acceptability (i.e., quality of care, communication with patients).ConclusionsThe results of this systematic literature review suggest a relationship between patient safety and burnout. These results potentially have important implications for the medical training milieu because residents are still in training and at the same time are asked to teach students. The results also indicate a need for more evidence-based interventions that support continued research examining quality of care measures, especially as they relate to acceptability.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-017-1040-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background COVID-19 causes significant morbidity and mortality. Despite the high prevalence of delirium and delirium-related symptoms in COVID-19 patients, data and evidence-based recommendations on the pathophysiology and management of delirium are limited. Objective We conducted a rapid review of COVID-19-related delirium literature to provide a synthesis of literature on the prevalence, pathoetiology, and management of delirium in these patients. Methods Systematic searches of Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, LitCovid, WHO-COVID-19, and Web of Science electronic databases were conducted. Grey literature was also reviewed, including preprint servers, archives, and websites of relevant organizations. Search results were limited to the English language. We included literature focused on adults with COVID-19 and delirium. Papers were excluded if they did not mention signs or symptoms of delirium. Results 229 studies described prevalence, pathoetiology, and/or management of delirium in adults with COVID-19. Delirium was rarely assessed with validated tools. Delirium affected >50% of all patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU. The etiology of COVID-19 delirium is likely multifactorial, with some evidence of direct brain effect. Prevention remains the cornerstone of management in these patients. To date, there is no evidence to suggest specific pharmacological strategies. Discussion Delirium is common in COVID-19 and may manifest from both indirect and direct effects on the central nervous system. Further research is required to investigate contributing mechanisms. As there is limited empirical literature on delirium management in COVID-19, management with non-pharmacological measures and judicious use of pharmacotherapy is suggested.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a number of negative health related consequences, including impacts on mental health. More than 22% of Canadians reported that they had felt depressed in the last week, in response to a December 2020 national survey. Given the need to physically distance during the pandemic, and the increase in demand for mental health services, digital interventions that support mental health and wellness may be beneficial. Objective The purpose of this research was to identify digital interventions that could be used to support the mental health of the Canadian general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objectives were to identify (1) the populations these interventions were developed for, inclusive of exploring areas of equity such as socioeconomic status, sex/gender, race/ethnicity and culture, and relevance to Indigenous peoples and communities; (2) the effect of the interventions; and (3) any barriers or facilitators to the use of the intervention. Methods This study was completed using a Cochrane Rapid Review methodology. A search of Embase, PsycInfo, Medline, and Web of Science, along with Google, Million Short, and popular mobile app libraries, was conducted. Two screeners were involved in applying inclusion criteria using Covidence software. Academic articles and mobile apps identified were screened using the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields resource, the American Psychiatric Association App Evaluation Framework, and the Mental Health Commission of Canada’s guidance on app assessment and selection. Results A total of 31 mobile apps and 114 web-based resources (eg, telemedicine, virtual peer support groups, discussion forums, etc) that could be used to support the mental health of the Canadian population during the pandemic were identified. These resources have been listed on a publicly available website along with search tags that may help an individual make a suitable selection. Variability exists in the populations that the interventions were developed for, and little assessment has been done with regard to areas of equity. The effect of the interventions was not reported for all those identified in this synthesis; however, for those that did report the effect, it was shown that they were effective in the context that they were used. A number of barriers and facilitators to using these interventions were identified, such as access, cost, and connectivity. Conclusions A number of digital interventions that could support population mental health in Canada during the global COVID-19 pandemic were identified, indicating that individuals have several options to choose from. These interventions vary in their purpose, approach, design, cost, and targeted user group. While some research and digital interventions addressed equity-related considerations, more research and focused attention should be given to this area.