Objectives: People who self-harm frequently present to the emergency department (ED) and are treated by generalist healthcare staff with no specialist mental health training. We systematically reviewed (i) training interventions for generalist ED providers and (ii) psychosocial interventions delivered predominantly by generalist ED providers for people who self-harm. Method: Five databases were searched for studies reporting on training interventions for generalist ED staff (at least 50% of the sample needed to be generalist ED staff) or psychosocial interventions for people who self-harm delivered predominantly by generalist ED staff. No limitations were placed regarding study design/country. Narrative synthesis was conducted. Results: Fifteen studies from high-income countries were included. Nine studies of moderate methodological quality evaluated training for generalist ED providers (n ¼ 1587). Six studies of good methodological quality evaluated psychosocial interventions for adults who self-harm (n ¼ 3133). Only one randomized controlled trial was identified. Training was linked with pre-post improvements in staff knowledge, and less consistently with improvement in skills, attitudes, and confidence. Evidence on patient outcomes was lacking. Patient-level interventions involving common suicide prevention strategiessafety planning and follow-up contact-were consistently linked to pre-post reductions in suicide attempts. Effects on treatment engagement and psychiatric admissions were unclear. Conclusions: There is a clear need for further RCTs to improve the evidence base for ED generalist providers managing patients with self-harm. Evidence supports potential benefits of training for improving staff knowledge, attitudes, and skills, and of safety planning and follow-up contact for reducing repeat suicide attempts. HIGHLIGHTSMore RCTs are needed to improve the evidence base for ED providers managing self-harm Safety planning and follow up contacts are linked to reductions in repeat suicide attempts Future research should investigate the impact of staff training on patient outcomes

Background/objectives In healthcare research investigating complex interventions, gaps in understanding of processes can be filled by using qualitative methods alongside a quantitative approach. The aim of this mixed-methods pilot trial was to provide feasibility evidence comparing two treatment regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) to inform a future large-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT). Subjects/methods Forty-four treatment-naïve nAMD patients were followed over 24 months and randomised to one of two treatment regimens: standard care (SC) or treat and extend (T&E). The primary objective evaluated feasibility of the MATE trial via evaluations of screening logs for recruitment rates, nonparticipation and screen fails, whilst qualitative in-depth interviews with key study staff evaluated the recruitment phase and running of the trial. The secondary objective assessed changes in visual acuity and central retinal thickness (CRT) between the two treatment arms. Results The overall recruitment rate was 3.07 participants per month with a 40.8% non-participation rate, 18.51% screen-failure rate and 15% withdrawal/non-completion rate. Key themes in the recruitment phase included human factors, protocol-related issues, recruitment processes and challenges. Both treatment regimens showed a trend towards a visual acuity gain at month 12 which was not maintained at month 24, whilst CRT reduced similarly in both regimens over the same time period. These were achieved with one less treatment following a T&E regimen. Conclusion This mixed-methodology, pilot RCT achieved its pre-defined recruitment, nonparticipation and screen failure rates, thus deeming it a success. With some minor protocol amendments, progression to a large-scale RCT will be achievable.

Background: People with severe mental illness have a heightened risk for type 2 diabetes. They also experience poorer outcomes, including more diabetes complications, more emergency admissions, lower quality of life and excess mortality.Aims: This systematic review aimed to identify health professionals' barriers to and enablers of delivering and organising type 2 diabetes care for people with severe mental illness.

No abstract

No abstract