BackgroundPsychological therapy is effective for symptoms of mental distress, but many groups with high levels of mental distress face significant barriers in terms of access to care, as current interventions may not be sensitive to their needs or their understanding of mental health. There is a need to develop forms of psychological therapy that are acceptable to these groups, feasible to deliver in routine settings, and clinically and cost effective.MethodsWe developed a culturally sensitive wellbeing intervention with individual, group and sign-posting elements, and tested its feasibility and acceptability for patients from ethnic minorities and older people in an exploratory randomised trial.ResultsWe recruited 57 patients (57% of our target) from 4 disadvantaged localities in the NW of England. The results of the exploratory trial suggest that the group receiving the wellbeing interventions improved compared to the group receiving usual care. For elders, the largest effects were on CORE-OM and PHQ-9. For ethnic minority patients, the largest effect was on PHQ-9. Qualitative data suggested that patients found the intervention acceptable, both in terms of content and delivery.ConclusionsThis exploratory trial provides some evidence of the efficacy and acceptability of a wellbeing intervention for older and ethnic minority groups experiencing anxiety and depression, although challenges in recruitment and engagement remain. Evidence from our exploratory study of wellbeing interventions should inform new substantive trial designs.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trials ISRCTN68572159
BackgroundWe conducted a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of smoking cessation, physical activity (PA), diet, and alcohol reduction interventions delivered by mobile technology to prevent non-communicable diseases (NCDs).MethodsWe searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of mobile-based NCD prevention interventions using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, CINAHL (Jan 1990–Jan 2016). Two authors extracted data.Findings71 trials were included: smoking cessation (n = 18); PA (n = 15), diet (n = 3), PA and diet (n = 25); PA, diet, and smoking cessation (n = 2); and harmful alcohol consumption (n = 8). 4 trials had low risk of bias. The effect of SMS-based smoking cessation support on biochemically verified continuous abstinence was pooled relative risk [RR] 2.19 [95% CI 1.80–2.68], I2 = 0%) and on verified 7 day point prevalence of smoking cessation was pooled RR 1.51 [95% CI 1.06–2.15], I2 = 0%, with no reported adverse events. There was no difference in peak oxygen intake at 3 months in a trial of an SMS-based PA intervention. The effect of SMS-based diet and PA interventions on: incidence of diabetes was pooled RR 0.67 [95% CI 0.49, 0.90], I2 = 0.0%; end-point weight was pooled MD -0.99Kg [95% CI -3.63, 1.64] I2 = 29.4%; % change in weight was pooled MD -3.1 [95%CI -4.86- -1.3] I2 0.3%; and on triglyceride levels was pooled MD -0.19 mmol/L [95% CI -0.29, -0.08], I2 = 0.0%. The results of other pooled analyses of the effect of SMS-based diet and PA interventions were heterogenous (I2 59–90%). The effects of alcohol reduction interventions were inconclusive.ConclusionsSmoking cessation support delivered by SMS increases quitting rates. Trials of PA interventions reporting outcomes ≥3 months showed no benefits. There were at best modest benefits of diet and PA interventions. The effects of the most promising SMS-based smoking, diet and PA interventions on morbidity and mortality in high-risk groups should be established in adequately powered RCTs.
RheothRx (Glaxo Wellcome Inc, Research Triangle Park, NC; poloxamer 188) Injection is a nonionic surfactant with hemorrheologic properties that suggest it may be useful in treating acute painful episodes (vasoocclusive crises) of sickle cell disease (SCD). We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of poloxamer, formulated as RheothRx Injection, in 50 patients with SCD. Patients with moderate to severe painful episodes requiring parenteral analgesics were randomized to receive a 48-hour infusion of either RheothRx or placebo. Pain was assessed every 4 hours. Efficacy endpoints included: (1) painful episode duration, (2) days of hospitalization, (3) quantity of analgesics used, and (4) pain intensity scores. Three subgroups of patients were considered for efficacy analyses based on the actual duration of the study drug infusion and the completeness of pain score data collection. Compared with placebo and depending on the subgroup, RheothRx-treated patients showed a 16% to 45% decrease in duration of painful episodes, a 1- to 2-day reduction in hospital stay, a threefold to fivefold reduction in analgesic requirements, and a 1-point reduction (using a 5-point scale) in average pain intensity scores at 72 hours. RheothRx was well tolerated; no clinically significant differences were observed between treatments with respect to adverse experiences or other safety measures. In addition, there were no differences between treatment groups in the incidence of recurrent painful episodes. In this study, RheothRx significantly reduced total analgesic use and pain intensity and showed trends to shorter duration of painful episodes and total days of hospitalization. In patients with moderate to severe vasoocclusive pain, RheothRx was safe and may offer a therapeutic benefit.
BackgroundCommon mental health problems impose substantial challenges to patients, carers, and health care systems. A range of interventions have demonstrable efficacy in improving the lives of people experiencing such problems. However many people are disadvantaged, either because they are unable to access primary care, or because access does not lead to adequate help. New methods are needed to understand the problems of access and generate solutions. In this paper we describe our methodological approach to managing multiple and diverse sources of evidence, within a research programme to increase equity of access to high quality mental health services in primary care.MethodsWe began with a scoping review to identify the range and extent of relevant published material, and establish key concepts related to access. We then devised a strategy to collect - in parallel - evidence from six separate sources: a systematic review of published quantitative data on access-related studies; a meta-synthesis of published qualitative data on patient perspectives; dialogues with local stakeholders; a review of grey literature from statutory and voluntary service providers; secondary analysis of patient transcripts from previous qualitative studies; and primary data from interviews with service users and carers.We synthesised the findings from these diverse sources, made judgements on key emerging issues in relation to needs and services, and proposed a range of potential interventions. These proposals were debated and refined using iterative electronic and focus group consultation procedures involving international experts, local stakeholders and service users.ConclusionsOur methods break new ground by generating and synthesising multiple sources of evidence, connecting scientific understanding with the perspectives of users, in order to develop innovative ways to meet the mental health needs of under-served groups.
BackgroundIn the United Kingdom and worldwide, there is significant policy interest in improving the quality of care for patients with mental health disorders and distress. Improving quality of care means addressing not only the effectiveness of interventions but also the issue of limited access to care. Research to date into improving access to mental health care has not been strongly rooted within a conceptual model, nor has it systematically identified the different elements of the patient journey from identification of illness to receipt of care. This paper set out to review core concepts underlying patient access to mental health care, synthesise these to develop a conceptual model of access, and consider the implications of the model for the development and evaluation of interventions for groups with poor access to mental health care such as older people and ethnic minorities.MethodsNarrative review of the literature to identify concepts underlying patient access to mental health care, and synthesis into a conceptual model to support the delivery and evaluation of complex interventions to improve access to mental health care.ResultsThe narrative review adopted a process model of access to care, incorporating interventions at three levels. The levels comprise (a) community engagement (b) addressing the quality of interactions in primary care and (c) the development and delivery of tailored psychosocial interventions.ConclusionsThe model we propose can form the basis for the development and evaluation of complex interventions in access to mental health care. We highlight the key methodological challenges in evaluating the overall impact of access interventions, and assessing the relative contribution of the different elements of the model.
Background. In the UK, most people with mental health problems are managed in primary care. However, many individuals in need of help are not able to access care, either because it is not available, or because the individual's interaction with care-givers deters or diverts help-seeking. Aims. To understand the experience of seeking care for distress from the perspective of potential patients from “hard-to-reach” groups. Methods. A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews, analysed using a thematic framework. Results. Access to primary care is problematic in four main areas: how distress is conceptualised by individuals, the decision to seek help, barriers to help-seeking, and navigating and negotiating services. Conclusion. There are complex reasons why people from “hard-to-reach” groups may not conceptualise their distress as a biomedical problem. In addition, there are particular barriers to accessing primary care when distress is recognised by the person and help-seeking is attempted. We suggest how primary care could be more accessible to people from “hard-to-reach” groups including the need to offer a flexible, non-biomedical response to distress.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.