Rapid tranquillisation – the parenteral administration of a sedating psychotropic – is frequently utilised to manage acute behavioural disturbances. Each mental health trust in England utilises independent guidelines for rapid tranquillisation, which vary geographically in both recommendations for therapeutic agents, as well as the format in which this information presented. Audits have identified that there is currently poor adherence to rapid tranquillisation protocol guidelines; this may be due to a lack of guideline clarity allowing for personal interpretation. This service evaluation aims to determine the clarity and uniformity of protocols outlined in mental health trust guidelines, in addition to analysing the outcomes of guideline testing to identify if there is consistency between policies, or whether outcomes varied depending on the trust guidelines used.

Five reviewers (of differing positions throughout clinical training) utilised 52 guidelines from each mental health trust in England, as well as Maudsley and NICE. These were assessed using the same fictional scenario, which simulated a common presentation in which the use of rapid tranquillisation is required. Reviewers deduced the most appropriate therapeutic agent according to the guideline, rated the clarity of each guideline and were invited to leave comments highlighting the guideline's useability.

Seven different management plans were generated by the majority of respondents from the 52 guidelines. Lorazepam was the most frequently selected therapeutic agent. Guidelines with better subjective ratings of clarity had more agreement between reviewers, but full agreement between reviewers was only present for 10 out of 52 guidelines. For 11 guidelines, consensual agreement between reviewers was not reached. Qualitative analysis of comments identified the inclusion of past medical history, drug history and flow charts as positive sub-themes. Redundant language, contradictions and the suggestion to seek senior intervention before trialling a second agent were viewed negatively. Many guidelines did not sufficiently emphasise the need for performing an ECG before administering therapeutic agents, such as haloperidol, which may lead to potentially fatal arrhythmias.

There is no national consensus on the most appropriate rapid tranquillisation agents, with the available evidence being interpreted variously by different trusts and organisations. Poor guideline comprehensibility impacts clinician adherence and allows for personal preference to influence choice of drug. Clear guidelines utilising flow charts to succinctly outline relevant doses and absolute contraindications were viewed favourably by reviewers. The findings of this project highlights to relevant stakeholders the attributes that should be implemented when improving guidelines for the future.

Clozapine is licensed for treatment-resistant psychosis and remains underutilised. This may berelated to the stringent haematological monitoring requirements that are mandatory in most countries. We aimed to compare guidelines internationally and develop a novel Stringency Index. We hypothesised that the most stringent countries would have increased healthcare costs and reduced prescription rates.

We conducted a literature review and survey of guidelines internationally. Guideline identification involved a literature review and consultation with clinical academics. We focused on the haematological monitoring parameters, frequency and thresholds for discontinuation and rechallenge after suspected clozapine-induced neutropenia. In addition, indicators reflecting monitoring guideline stringency were scored and visualised using a choropleth map. We developed a Stringency Index with an international panel of clozapine experts, through a modified-Delphi-survey. The Stringency Index was compared to health expenditure per-capita and clozapine prescription per 100 000 persons.

One hundred twocountries were included, from Europe (n = 35), Asia (n = 24), Africa (n = 20), South America (n = 11), North America (n = 7) and Oceania and Australia (n = 5). Guidelines differed in frequency of haematological monitoring and discontinuation thresholds. Overall, 5% of included countries had explicit guidelines for clozapine-rechallenge and 40% explicitly prohibited clozapine-rechallenge. Furthermore, 7% of included countries had modified discontinuation thresholds for benign ethnic neutropenia. None of the guidelines specified how long haematological monitoring should continue. The most stringent guidelines were in Europe, and the least stringent were in Africa and South America. There was a positive association (r = 0.43, p < 0.001) between a country's Stringency Index and healthcare expenditure per capita.

Recommendations on how haematological function should be monitored in patients treated with clozapine vary considerably between countries. It would be useful to standardise guidelines on haematological monitoring worldwide.

Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) has traditionally been used in infection prevention to confirm or refute the presence of an outbreak after it has occurred. Due to decreasing costs of WGS, an increasing number of institutions have been utilizing WGS-based surveillance. Additionally, machine learning or statistical modeling to supplement infection prevention practice have also been used. We systematically reviewed the use of WGS surveillance and machine learning to detect and investigate outbreaks in healthcare settings.

We performed a PubMed search using separate terms for WGS surveillance and/or machine-learning technologies for infection prevention through March 15, 2021.

Of 767 studies returned using the WGS search terms, 42 articles were included for review. Only 2 studies (4.8%) were performed in real time, and 39 (92.9%) studied only 1 pathogen. Nearly all studies (n = 41, 97.6%) found genetic relatedness between some isolates collected. Across all studies, 525 outbreaks were detected among 2,837 related isolates (average, 5.4 isolates per outbreak). Also, 35 studies (83.3%) only utilized geotemporal clustering to identify outbreak transmission routes. Of 21 studies identified using the machine-learning search terms, 4 were included for review. In each study, machine learning aided outbreak investigations by complementing methods to gather epidemiologic data and automating identification of transmission pathways.

WGS surveillance is an emerging method that can enhance outbreak detection. Machine learning has the potential to identify novel routes of pathogen transmission. Broader incorporation of WGS surveillance into infection prevention practice has the potential to transform the detection and control of healthcare outbreaks.

The ‘jumping to conclusions’ (JTC) bias is associated with both psychosis and general cognition but their relationship is unclear. In this study, we set out to clarify the relationship between the JTC bias, IQ, psychosis and polygenic liability to schizophrenia and IQ.

A total of 817 first episode psychosis patients and 1294 population-based controls completed assessments of general intelligence (IQ), and JTC, and provided blood or saliva samples from which we extracted DNA and computed polygenic risk scores for IQ and schizophrenia.

The estimated proportion of the total effect of case/control differences on JTC mediated by IQ was 79%. Schizophrenia polygenic risk score was non-significantly associated with a higher number of beads drawn (B = 0.47, 95% CI −0.21 to 1.16, p = 0.17); whereas IQ PRS (B = 0.51, 95% CI 0.25–0.76, p < 0.001) significantly predicted the number of beads drawn, and was thus associated with reduced JTC bias. The JTC was more strongly associated with the higher level of psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) in controls, including after controlling for IQ (B = −1.7, 95% CI −2.8 to −0.5, p = 0.006), but did not relate to delusions in patients.

Our findings suggest that the JTC reasoning bias in psychosis might not be a specific cognitive deficit but rather a manifestation or consequence, of general cognitive impairment. Whereas, in the general population, the JTC bias is related to PLEs, independent of IQ. The work has the potential to inform interventions targeting cognitive biases in early psychosis.

Successful scale-up of integrated primary mental healthcare requires routine monitoring of key programme performance indicators. A consensus set of mental health indicators has been proposed but evidence on their use in routine settings is lacking.

To assess the acceptability, feasibility, perceived costs and sustainability of implementing indicators relating to integrated mental health service coverage in six South Asian (India, Nepal) and sub-Saharan African countries (Ethiopia, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda).

A qualitative study using semi-structured key informant interviews (n = 128) was conducted. The ‘Performance of Routine Information Systems’ framework served as the basis for a coding framework covering three main categories related to the performance of new tools introduced to collect data on mental health indicators: (1) technical; (2) organisation; and (3) behavioural determinants.

Most mental health indicators were deemed relevant and potentially useful for improving care, and therefore acceptable to end users. Exceptions were indicators on functionality, cost and severity. The simplicity of the data-capturing formats contributed to the feasibility of using forms to generate data on mental health indicators. Health workers reported increasing confidence in their capacity to record the mental health data and minimal additional cost to initiate mental health reporting. However, overstretched primary care staff and the time-consuming reporting process affected perceived sustainability.

Use of the newly developed, contextually appropriate mental health indicators in health facilities providing primary care services was seen largely to be feasible in the six Emerald countries, mainly because of the simplicity of the forms and continued support in the design and implementation stage. However, approaches to implementation of new forms generating data on mental health indicators need to be customised to the specific health system context of different countries. Further work is needed to identify ways to utilise mental health data to monitor and improve the quality of mental health services.

None.

Current coverage of mental healthcare in low- and middle-income countries is very limited, not only in terms of access to services but also in terms of financial protection of individuals in need of care and treatment.

To identify the challenges, opportunities and strategies for more equitable and sustainable mental health financing in six sub-Saharan African and South Asian countries, namely Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda.

In the context of a mental health systems research project (Emerald), a multi-methods approach was implemented consisting of three steps: a quantitative and narrative assessment of each country's disease burden profile, health system and macro-fiscal situation; in-depth interviews with expert stakeholders; and a policy analysis of sustainable financing options.

Key challenges identified for sustainable mental health financing include the low level of funding accorded to mental health services, widespread inequalities in access and poverty, although opportunities exist in the form of new political interest in mental health and ongoing reforms to national insurance schemes. Inclusion of mental health within planned or nascent national health insurance schemes was identified as a key strategy for moving towards more equitable and sustainable mental health financing in all six countries.

Including mental health in ongoing national health insurance reforms represent the most important strategic opportunity in the six participating countries to secure enhanced service provision and financial protection for individuals and households affected by mental disorders and psychosocial disabilities.

D.C. is a staff member of the World Health Organization.

In most low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), routine mental health information is unavailable or unreliable, making monitoring of mental healthcare coverage difficult. This study aims to evaluate a new set of mental health indicators introduced in primary healthcare settings in five LMIC.

A survey was conducted among primary healthcare workers (n = 272) to assess the acceptability and feasibility of eight new indicators monitoring mental healthcare needs, utilisation, quality and payments. Also, primary health facility case records (n = 583) were reviewed by trained research assistants to assess the level of completion (yes/no) for each of the indicators and subsequently the level of correctness of completion (correct/incorrect – with incorrect defined as illogical, missing or illegible information) of the indicators used by health workers. Assessments were conducted within 1 month of the introduction of the indicators, as well as 6–9 months afterwards.

Across both time points and across all indicators, 78% of the measurements of indicators were complete. Among the best performing indicators (diagnosis, severity and treatment), this was significantly higher. With regards to correctness, 87% of all completed indicators were correctly completed. There was a trend towards improvement over time. Health workers' perceptions on feasibility and utility, across sites and over time, indicated a positive attitude in 81% of all measurements.

This study demonstrates high levels of performance and perceived utility for a set of indicators that could ultimately be used to monitor coverage of mental healthcare in primary healthcare settings in LMIC. We recommend that these indicators are incorporated into existing health information systems and adopted within the World Health Organization Mental Health Gap Action Programme implementation strategy.

None.

There is a global drive to improve access to mental healthcare by scaling up integrated mental health into primary healthcare (PHC) systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

To investigate systems-level implications of efforts to scale-up integrated mental healthcare into PHC in districts in six LMICs.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 121 managers and service providers. Transcribed interviews were analysed using framework analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and World Health Organization basic building blocks.

Ensuring that interventions are synergistic with existing health system features and strengthening of the healthcare system building blocks to support integrated chronic care and task-sharing were identified as aiding integration efforts. The latter includes (a) strengthening governance to include technical support for integration efforts as well as multisectoral collaborations; (b) ring-fencing mental health budgets at district level; (c) a critical mass of mental health specialists to support task-sharing; (d) including key mental health indicators in the health information system; (e) psychotropic medication included on free essential drug lists and (f) enabling collaborative and community- oriented PHC-service delivery platforms and continuous quality improvement to aid service delivery challenges in implementation.

Scaling up integrated mental healthcare in PHC in LMICs is more complex than training general healthcare providers. Leveraging existing health system processes that are synergistic with chronic care services and strengthening healthcare system building blocks to provide a more enabling context for integration are important.

None.