University and college students are vulnerable to developing depressive symptoms. People in low-income countries are disproportionately impacted by mental health problems, yet few studies examine routes to accessing clinical services. Examining motivation and barriers toward seeking clinical mental health services in university students in Bangladesh is important.

Using a cross-sectional survey (n = 350), we assess the relationship between the constructs of autonomy, relatedness, and competency toward using clinical mental health practices (i.e. using professional resources, taking medication) with (1) positive views, (2) perceived need, and (3) use of clinical mental health services among Bangladeshi university students.

Results showed that the perceived need for mental health support was the predictor of the largest magnitude (aOR = 4.99, p = 0.005) for using clinical services. Having a positive view of clinical services was predictive of clinical service use (aOR = 2.87, p = 0.033); however, that association became insignificant (p = 0.054) when adjusting for the perceived need for mental health care. Of the SDT constructs, social influences were predictive of perceiving a need for mental health support, and mental health knowledge was predictive (aOR = 1.10, p = 0.001) of having a positive view of clinical mental health care.

Our findings show that knowledge of mental health is associated with positive views of mental health services, and that higher levels of stress and the presence of people with mental health problems are associated with the perception of a need for mental health care, which is ultimately responsible for using the services.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted lives and livelihoods, and people already experiencing mental ill health may have been especially vulnerable.

Quantify mental health inequalities in disruptions to healthcare, economic activity and housing.

We examined data from 59 482 participants in 12 UK longitudinal studies with data collected before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Within each study, we estimated the association between psychological distress assessed pre-pandemic and disruptions since the start of the pandemic to healthcare (medication access, procedures or appointments), economic activity (employment, income or working hours) and housing (change of address or household composition). Estimates were pooled across studies.

Across the analysed data-sets, 28% to 77% of participants experienced at least one disruption, with 2.3–33.2% experiencing disruptions in two or more domains. We found 1 s.d. higher pre-pandemic psychological distress was associated with (a) increased odds of any healthcare disruptions (odds ratio (OR) 1.30, 95% CI 1.20–1.40), with fully adjusted odds ratios ranging from 1.24 (95% CI 1.09–1.41) for disruption to procedures to 1.33 (95% CI 1.20–1.49) for disruptions to prescriptions or medication access; (b) loss of employment (odds ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.06–1.21) and income (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.06 –1.19), and reductions in working hours/furlough (odds ratio 1.05, 95% CI 1.00–1.09) and (c) increased likelihood of experiencing a disruption in at least two domains (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.18–1.32) or in one domain (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.07–1.16), relative to no disruption. There were no associations with housing disruptions (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97–1.03).

People experiencing psychological distress pre-pandemic were more likely to experience healthcare and economic disruptions, and clusters of disruptions across multiple domains during the pandemic. Failing to address these disruptions risks further widening mental health inequalities.

To describe a pilot project infection prevention and control (IPC) assessment conducted in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) in New York State (NYS) during a pivotal 2-week period when the region became the nation’s epicenter for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

A telephone and video assessment of IPC measures in SNFs at high risk or experiencing COVID-19 activity.

SNFs in 14 New York counties, including New York City.

A 3-component remote IPC assessment: (1) screening tool; (2) telephone IPC checklist; and (3) COVID-19 video IPC assessment (ie, “COVIDeo”).

In total, 92 SNFs completed the IPC screening tool and checklist: 52 (57%) were conducted as part COVID-19 investigations, and 40 (43%) were proactive prevention-based assessments. Among the 40 proactive assessments, 14 (35%) identified suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases. COVIDeo was performed in 26 (28%) of 92 assessments and provided observations that other tools would have missed: personal protective equipment (PPE) that was not easily accessible, redundant, or improperly donned, doffed, or stored and specific challenges implementing IPC in specialty populations. The IPC assessments took ∼1 hour each and reached an estimated 4 times as many SNFs as on-site visits in a similar time frame.

Remote IPC assessments by telephone and video were timely and feasible methods of assessing the extent to which IPC interventions had been implemented in a vulnerable setting and to disseminate real-time recommendations. Remote assessments are now being implemented across New York State and in various healthcare facility types. Similar methods have been adapted nationally by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

There is global interest in the reconfiguration of community mental health services, including primary care, to improve clinical and cost effectiveness.

This study seeks to describe patterns of service use, continuity of care, health risks, physical healthcare monitoring and the balance between primary and secondary mental healthcare for people with severe mental illness in receipt of secondary mental healthcare in the UK.

We conducted an epidemiological medical records review in three UK sites. We identified 297 cases randomly selected from the three participating mental health services. Data were manually extracted from electronic patient medical records from both secondary and primary care, for a 2-year period (2012–2014). Continuous data were summarised by mean and s.d. or median and interquartile range (IQR). Categorical data were summarised as percentages.

The majority of care was from secondary care practitioners: of the 18 210 direct contacts recorded, 76% were from secondary care (median, 36.5; IQR, 14–68) and 24% were from primary care (median, 10; IQR, 5–20). There was evidence of poor longitudinal continuity: in primary care, 31% of people had poor longitudinal continuity (Modified Modified Continuity Index ≤0.5), and 43% had a single named care coordinator in secondary care services over the 2 years.

The study indicates scope for improvement in supporting mental health service delivery in primary care. Greater knowledge of how care is organised presents an opportunity to ensure some rebalancing of the care that all people with severe mental illness receive, when they need it. A future publication will examine differences between the three sites that participated in this study.

Oxidative stress is implicated in the aetiology of schizophrenia, and the antioxidant defence system (AODS) may be protective in this illness. We examined the major antioxidant glutathione (GSH) in prefrontal brain and its correlates with clinical and demographic variables in schizophrenia.

GSH levels were measured in the dorsolateral prefrontal region of 28 patients with chronic schizophrenia using a magnetic resonance spectroscopy sequence specifically adapted for GSH. We examined correlations of GSH levels with age, age at onset of illness, duration of illness, and clinical symptoms.

We found a negative correlation between GSH levels and age at onset (r = −0.46, p = 0.015), and a trend-level positive relationship between GSH and duration of illness (r = 0.34, p = 0.076).

Our findings are consistent with a possible compensatory upregulation of the AODS with longer duration of illness and suggest that the AODS may play a role in schizophrenia.

Disasters can damage the essential public health infrastructure and social protection systems required for vulnerable populations. This contributes to indirect mortality and morbidity as high as 70–90%, primarily due to an exacerbation of life-threatening conditions and chronic diseases. Despite this, the traditional focus of public health systems has been on communicable diseases. To address this challenge, disaster and health planners require access to repeatable and measurable methods to rank and prioritize the needs of people with life-threatening and chronic diseases before, during, and after a disaster.

Propose a repeatable and measurable method for ranking and prioritizing the needs of people with life-threatening and chronic diseases before, during, and after a disaster.

The research began with identifying the risk disasters pose to people with life-threatening and chronic diseases. The data gathered was then used to develop indicators and explore the use of DisasterAWARE™ (All-hazard Warnings, Analysis, and Risk Evaluation) to rank and prioritize the needs before, during, and after a disaster.

This research found people at greatest risk are those with underlying cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, unstable diabetes, renal diseases, and those undergoing cancer treatment. A sustainable method to help address this problem is to expand the use of DisasterAWARE™ (All-hazard Warnings, Analysis, and Risk Evaluation) to rank and prioritize needs at national and sub-national levels.

DisasterAWARE™ has been successfully applied to the assessment and prioritization of disaster risk and humanitarian assistance needs in Southeast Asia (ASEAN, Viet Nam), Central America (Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua), South America (Peru), and the Caribbean (Jamaica, Dominican Republic). Using the indicators developed through this research, this proven methodology can be seamlessly and easily translated to rank and prioritize the needs of people with life-threatening and chronic diseases before, during, and after a disaster.