Evidence Based Mental Health最新文献

Universal school programmes aimed at the prevention of depression and other common mental health problems in adolescents are attractive because they are less stigmatising than targeted interventions, have a high uptake and may shift the 'normal distribution' of mental health problems in the positive direction. Research up to now shows small effects of these interventions, but even small effects may have a large impact because of the large number of people receiving these interventions. However, such small effects may also be related to the modest quality of the trials in this area. This means that current research has no clear indication whether universal prevention has a large public health impact or no impact at all. The MYRIAD trial is a large, fully powered, high-quality study showing that universal prevention probably is not effective, although it it is possible that other interventions or approaches do have significant effects. We should seriously consider to move to other approaches to reduce the disease burden of depression in adolescents. Indirect approaches seem to be a feasible and promising alternative approach to prevention and increase the uptake of effective interventions.

Background: Systematic reviews suggest school-based mindfulness training (SBMT) shows promise in promoting student mental health.

Objective: The My Resilience in Adolescence (MYRIAD) Trial evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of SBMT compared with teaching-as-usual (TAU).

Methods: MYRIAD was a parallel group, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Eighty-five eligible schools consented and were randomised 1:1 to TAU (43 schools, 4232 students) or SBMT (42 schools, 4144 students), stratified by school size, quality, type, deprivation and region. Schools and students (mean (SD); age range=12.2 (0.6); 11-14 years) were broadly UK population-representative. Forty-three schools (n=3678 pupils; 86.9%) delivering SBMT, and 41 schools (n=3572; 86.2%) delivering TAU, provided primary end-point data. SBMT comprised 10 lessons of psychoeducation and mindfulness practices. TAU comprised standard social-emotional teaching. Participant-level risk for depression, social-emotional-behavioural functioning and well-being at 1 year follow-up were the co-primary outcomes. Secondary and economic outcomes were included.

Findings: Analysis of 84 schools (n=8376 participants) found no evidence that SBMT was superior to TAU at 1 year. Standardised mean differences (intervention minus control) were: 0.005 (95% CI -0.05 to 0.06) for risk for depression; 0.02 (-0.02 to 0.07) for social-emotional-behavioural functioning; and 0.02 (-0.03 to 0.07) for well-being. SBMT had a high probability of cost-effectiveness (83%) at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life year. No intervention-related adverse events were observed.

Conclusions: Findings do not support the superiority of SBMT over TAU in promoting mental health in adolescence.

Clinical implications: There is need to ask what works, for whom and how, as well as considering key contextual and implementation factors.

Trial registration: Current controlled trials ISRCTN86619085. This research was funded by the Wellcome Trust (WT104908/Z/14/Z and WT107496/Z/15/Z).

Background: Education is broader than academic teaching. It includes teaching students social-emotional skills both directly and indirectly through a positive school climate.

Objective: To evaluate if a universal school-based mindfulness training (SBMT) enhances teacher mental health and school climate.

Methods: The My Resilience in Adolescence parallel group, cluster randomised controlled trial (registration: ISRCTN86619085; funding: Wellcome Trust (WT104908/Z/14/Z, WT107496/Z/15/Z)) recruited 85 schools (679 teachers) delivering social and emotional teaching across the UK. Schools (clusters) were randomised 1:1 to either continue this provision (teaching as usual (TAU)) or include universal SBMT. Data on teacher mental health and school climate were collected at prerandomisation, postpersonal mindfulness and SBMT teacher training, after delivering SBMT to students, and at 1-year follow-up.

Finding: Schools were recruited in academic years 2016/2017 and 2017/2018. Primary analysis (SBMT: 43 schools/362 teachers; TAU: 41 schools/310 teachers) showed that after delivering SBMT to students, SBMT versus TAU enhanced teachers' mental health (burnout) and school climate. Adjusted standardised mean differences (SBMT minus TAU) were: exhaustion (-0.22; 95% CI -0.38 to -0.05); personal accomplishment (-0.21; -0.41, -0.02); school leadership (0.24; 0.04, 0.44); and respectful climate (0.26; 0.06, 0.47). Effects on burnout were not significant at 1-year follow-up. Effects on school climate were maintained only for respectful climate. No SBMT-related serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusions: SBMT supports short-term changes in teacher burnout and school climate. Further work is required to explore how best to sustain improvements.

Clinical implications: SBMT has limited effects on teachers' mental and school climate. Innovative approaches to support and preserve teachers' mental health and school climate are needed.

Background: Preventing mental health problems in early adolescence is a priority. School-based mindfulness training (SBMT) is an approach with mixed evidence.

Objectives: To explore for whom SBMT does/does not work and what influences outcomes.

Methods: The My Resilience in Adolescence was a parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial (K=84 secondary schools; n=8376 students, age: 11-13) recruiting schools that provided standard social-emotional learning. Schools were randomised 1:1 to continue this provision (control/teaching as usual (TAU)), and/or to offer SBMT ('.b' (intervention)). Risk of depression, social-emotional-behavioural functioning and well-being were measured at baseline, preintervention, post intervention and 1 year follow-up. Hypothesised moderators, implementation factors and mediators were analysed using mixed effects linear regressions, instrumental variable methods and path analysis.

Findings: SBMT versus TAU resulted in worse scores on risk of depression and well-being in students at risk of mental health problems both at post intervention and 1-year follow-up, but differences were small and not clinically relevant. Higher dose and reach were associated with worse social-emotional-behavioural functioning at postintervention. No implementation factors were associated with outcomes at 1-year follow-up. Pregains-postgains in mindfulness skills and executive function predicted better outcomes at 1-year follow-up, but the SBMT was unsuccessful to teach these skills with clinical relevance.SBMT as delivered in this trial is not indicated as a universal intervention. Moreover, it may be contraindicated for students with existing/emerging mental health symptoms.

Clinical implications: Universal SBMT is not recommended in this format in early adolescence. Future research should explore social-emotional learning programmes adapted to the unique needs of young people.

Improving child and adolescent mental health requires the careful development and rigorous testing of interventions and delivery methods. This includes universal school-based mindfulness training, evaluated in the My Resilience in Adolescence (MYRIAD) trial reported in this special edition. While discovering effective interventions through randomised controlled trials is our ultimate aim, null or negative results can and should play an important role in progressing our understanding of what works. Unfortunately, alongside publication bias there can be a tendency to ignore, spin or unfairly undermine disappointing findings. This creates research waste that can increase risk and reduce benefits for future service users. We advocate several practices to help optimise learning from all trials, whatever the results: stronger intervention design reduces the likelihood of foreseeable null or negative results; an evidence-informed conceptual map of the subject area assists with understanding how results contribute to the knowledge base; mixed methods trial designs aid explanation of outcome results; various open science practices support the dispassionate analysis of data and transparent reporting of trial findings; and preparation for null or negative results helps to temper stakeholder expectations and increase understanding of why we conduct trials in the first place. To embed these practices, research funders must be willing to pay for pilot studies and 'thicker' trials, and publishers should judge trials according to their conduct and not their outcome. MYRIAD is an exemplar of how to design, conduct and report a trial to optimise learning, with important implications for practice.

Background: Antipsychotics are increasingly used among women of childbearing age and during pregnancy.

Objective: To determine whether children exposed to antipsychotics in utero are at increased risk of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or autism spectrum disorder (ASD), accounting for maternal diagnoses of bipolar, psychotic and other psychiatric disorders. Design Population-based cohort study, including a sibling analysis. Setting Nationwide data on all pregnant women and their live-born singletons in Denmark (1997-2017), Finland (1996-2016), Iceland (2004-2017), Norway (2004-2017), and Sweden (2006-2016). Participants 4 324 086 children were eligible for inclusion to the study cohort. Intervention Antipsychotic exposure in utero, assessed by pregnancy trimester, type of antipsychotic, and varying patterns of use. Main outcome measures Non-mutually exclusive diagnoses of ADHD and ASD. We used Cox proportional hazard models to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) controlling for maternal psychiatric disorders and other potential confounding factors.

Findings: Among 4 324 086 singleton births, 15 466 (0.4%) were exposed to antipsychotics in utero. During a median follow-up of 10 years, we identified 72 257 children with ADHD and 38 674 children with ASD. Unadjusted HRs were raised for both outcomes but shifted substantially towards the null after adjustment; 1.10 (95%CI 1.00 to 1.27) for ADHD and 1.12 (0.97 to 1.29) for ASD. Adjusted HRs remained consistent by trimester of exposure and type of antipsychotic. Comparing in utero exposure with pre-pregnancy use yielded HRs of 0.74 (0.62 to 0.87) for ADHD and 0.88 (0.70 to 1.10) for ASD. Sibling analyses yielded HRs of 1.14 (0.79 to 1.64) for ADHD and 1.34 (0.75 to 2.39) for ASD.

Discussion: Our findings suggest little or no increased risk of child ADHD or ASD after in utero exposure to antipsychotics.

Clinical implications: Results regarding child neurodevelopment are reassuring for women who need antipsychotics during pregnancy.

Background: Advances in genetics and digital phenotyping in psychiatry have given rise to testing services targeting young people, which claim to predict psychiatric outcomes before difficulties emerge. These services raise several ethical challenges surrounding data sharing and information privacy.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate young people's interest in predictive testing for mental health challenges and their attitudes towards sharing biological, psychosocial and digital data for such purpose.

Methods: Eighty UK adolescents aged 16-18 years took part in a digital role-play where they played the role of clients of a fictional predictive psychiatry company and chose what sources of personal data they wished to provide for a risk assessment. After the role-play, participants reflected on their choices during a peer-led interview.

Findings: Participants saw multiple benefits in predictive testing services, but were highly selective with regard to the type of data they were willing to share. Largely due to privacy concerns, digital data sources such as social media or Google search history were less likely to be shared than psychosocial and biological data, including school grades and one's DNA. Participants were particularly reluctant to share social media data with schools (but less so with health systems).

Conclusions: Emerging predictive psychiatric services are valued by young people; however, these services must consider privacy versus utility trade-offs from the perspective of different stakeholders, including adolescents.

Clinical implications: Respecting adolescents' need for transparency, privacy and choice in the age of digital phenotyping is critical to the responsible implementation of predictive psychiatric services.

Background: The association between serum folate deficiency and the risk of dementia in old age is unclear, perhaps owing to small sample sizes, the competing risk of mortality or reverse causation.

Objective: To examine the associations between serum folate deficiency and the risks of incident dementia and all-cause mortality in a large national sample of older adults.

Methods: A prospective cohort aged 60-75 years (n=27 188) without pre-existing dementia for at least 10 years, was tested for serum concentrations of folate and followed up for dementia or all-cause mortality. Serum folate deficiency was classified as present (<4.4 ng/mL), otherwise absent. HRs and 95% CIs from competing risks Cox models were fitted to quantify the associations between serum folate deficiency and the risks of dementia and all-cause mortality. To examine reverse causation, the analysis was stratified by duration of follow-up.

Findings: The presence compared with the absence of serum folate deficiency was associated with higher risks of dementia (HR=1.68; 95% CI 1.32 to 2.13; p<0.001) and all-cause mortality (HR=2.98; 95% CI 2.52 to 3.52; p<0.001). Evidence for reverse causation were moderate for dementia and mild for all-cause mortality.

Conclusions: Serum concentrations of folate may function as a biomarker used to identify those at risk of dementia and mortality; however, reverse causation is likely. Further research is needed to examine the role of serum folate deficiency in dementia aetiology.

Clinical implications: Serum folate deficiency in older adults requires monitoring and treatment for preventative measures and/or as part of implemented therapeutic strategies.

Question: The aim was to systematically collate and synthesise existing, publicly available patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) information suitable for quality of life (QOL)/well-being measurement in mental health economic evaluations, with specific focus on their applicability in multisectoral, multinational, multiperson economic evaluations and to develop an electronic PROM compendium with meta-data.

Study selection and analysis: A systematic literature search for non-disease-pecific PROMs and their versions suitable for the measurement of QOL/well-being or recovery was conducted from 2008 to February 2020. Six criteria were applied to judge their suitability in multisectoral, multinational, multiperson economic evaluations: (i) availability of separate adult and child/adolescent versions, (ii) availability of a proxy-completion option, (iii) assessing outcomes beyond health, (iv) availability of translations (≥2 language versions), (v) availability of a preference-based valuation, (vi) availability of value sets in more than one country.

Findings: The final ProgrammE in Costing, resource use measurement and outcome valuation for Use in multisectoral National and International health economic evaluAtions (PECUNIA) PROM-MH Compendium includes 204 unique scales, out of which 88 are individual instruments, while the remaining 116 scales belong to 46 PROM families with more than one distinctive version. Out of the total 134 individual PROMs/PROM families, 72% have at least two language versions, 8% measure broader well-being beyond health-related QOL, 11% have preference-based valuation, with multiple country sets available for 60% of these. None of the identified PROMs met all six proposed criteria.

Conclusions: The PECUNIA PROM-MH Compendium provides a unique overview of the relevant PROMs and their linked meta-data, and should be a helpful tool when choosing a suitable instrument for future mental health economic evaluations.