A cluster randomized controlled trial of an online psychoeducational intervention for people with a family history of depression

Perceptions of causal attribution and attitudes to genetic testing among people with schizophrenia and their first-degree relatives

Rapid advances in the genetics of psychiatric disorders mean that diagnostic and predictive genetic testing for schizophrenia risk may one day be a reality. This study examined how causal attributions for schizophrenia contribute to interest in a hypothetical genetic test. People with schizophrenia and first-degree relatives of people with schizophrenia were recruited through a schizophrenia research bank and mental health organisation. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 13 individuals with schizophrenia and 8 first-degree relatives. Transcripts were subjected to a qualitative analysis using the thematic analysis framework. Five themes were developed: (i) "It is like a cocktail", with most participants aware that both genetic and environmental factors contributed to causation, and many mentioning the positive impact of genetic causal explanations; (ii) "Knowledge is power" (i.e., in favour of genetic testing); (iii) Genetic testing provides opportunities for early intervention and avoiding triggers, with participants citing a wide range of perceived benefits of genetic testing but few risks; (iv) Views on reproductive genetic testing for schizophrenia risk with a few participants viewing it as "playing God" but not necessarily being against it; and (v) "It snowballs", whereby participants' understanding of genetics was sophisticated with most believing that multiple rather than single genes contributed to schizophrenia. In conclusion, many individuals had a sound understanding of the role of genetic testing if it were to become available, with evidence of insight into the role of multiple genes and the contribution of other risk factors that may interact with any inherited genetic risk.

The Use of Telehealth in Depression Treatment during the Crisis Caused by COVID-19

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been increased interest in telehealth as a means of providing care for depression. In this article, we provide an overview of telehealth utilization for the treatment of depression and provide some insight into the rapid shift made to quickly implement these telehealth services into our everyday practices due to COVID-19 personal distancing requirements. We review the application of telehealth in the treatment of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. The multiple advantages and disadvantages of telehealth in treatment of depression are summarized through the literature, and we analyze the methods to improve the effect and quality of telehealth in depression treatment. It has been highlighted in the current research that against its proven capacity for convenience, its relative cheapness, and its ability to overcome geographic barriers, telehealth has its own shortfalls, including disparities in rural-urban infrastructure and an alleged inability to be exhaustive when intensive interventions are needed. Recommendations for the improvement of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic also presuppose that it is infrastructure and human resource intensive and that short-term improvements in its efficiency are largely dependent on the creativity and resourcefulness of physicians to provide custom solutions for patients.

VALIDATION OF THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL IMPACT OF CANCER RISK ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE TO ASSESS IMPACT OF WAITING FOR GENOME SEQUENCING RESULTS

Objective

To determine whether the existing Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) scale, which assesses impact of receiving genetic test results on individuals being assessed for cancer risk, can be successfully adapted to cancer patients experiencing prolonged waiting for results of germline genome sequencing (GS).

Methods

Patients previously diagnosed with likely hereditary cancer (n = 250) who were waiting for germline GS results completed questionnaires 3 months after baseline. We adapted the MICRA to measure anxiety associated with waiting for results, and assessed factor structure, internal consistency, test–retest reliability and construct validation.

Results

Factor analysis revealed four factors: distress, positive experience, family support and uncertainty. Internal consistency for each sub‐scale was high with the values of Cronbach's alpha for the distress, positive experiences, family support and uncertainty sub‐scales 0.92, 0.88, 0.92 and 0.87, respectively. Test–retest reliability was poor, with intra‐class correlations of 0.53, 0.13, 0.33 and 0.52 for the four factors, respectively. Construct validation showed large correlations between the MICRA distress and uncertainty sub‐scale scores and the Impact of Events score intrusion (0.42 and 0.62, respectively) and IES avoidant thinking sub‐scales (0.40 and 0.58, respectively) but not the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale sub‐scales.

Conclusions

The adapted MICRA identified test‐related anxiety and uncertainty in a population of cancer patients waiting for germline GS results. Results suggest that the distress and uncertainty sub‐scales of the adapted measure are most useful in this context.

The adapted Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) scale identifies germline genome sequencing (GS) test‐related anxiety and uncertainty in cancer patients undergoing prolonged waiting for results

Use of the adapted MICRA scale will enable identification of patients who require psychological support while awaiting germline GS test results

Testing the Structural Validity of the Self-Stigma Scale in Relatives of People with Autism in the Spanish Context

Sometimes, relatives of children with autism experience feelings of guilt, abandonment and devaluation, as they tend to see themselves as the cause of their children’s illness. This causes social isolation and psychological discomfort. However, there are no scales that assess self-stigma. Therefore, the aim of the study is to show evidence of the validity and reliability of the Self-Stigma Scale in Relatives of People with Mental Illness in the Spanish context in relation to autism. A total of 287 progenitors participated in the study. For the validation and adaptation process, three confirmatory factor analyses, analysis of invariance across gender, reliability analysis and temporal stability, were carried out. The results revealed that the factor structure of the questionnaire was adequate, showing adequate levels of reliability.

Supporting anticoagulant treatment decision making to optimise stroke prevention in complex patients with atrial fibrillation: a cluster randomised trial

Background

Anticoagulation for preventing stroke in atrial fibrillation is under-utilised despite evidence supporting its use, resulting in avoidable death and disability. We aimed to evaluate an intervention to improve the uptake of anticoagulation.

Methods

We carried out a national, cluster randomised controlled trial in the Australian primary health care setting. General practitioners received an educational session, delivered via telephone by a medical peer and provided information about their patients selected either because they were not receiving anticoagulation or for whom anticoagulation was considered challenging. General practitioners were randomised to receive feedback from a medical specialist about the cases (expert decisional support) either before or after completing a post-test audit. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients reported as receiving oral anticoagulation. A secondary outcome assessed antithrombotic treatment as appropriate against guideline recommendations.

Results

One hundred and seventy-nine general practitioners participated in the trial, contributing information about 590 cases. At post-test, 152 general practitioners (84.9%) completed data collection on 497 cases (84.2%). A 4.6% (Adjusted Relative Risk = 1.11, 95% CI = 0.86–1.43) difference in the post-test utilization of anticoagulation between groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.42). Sixty-one percent of patients in both groups received appropriate antithrombotic management according to evidence-based guidelines at post-test (Adjusted Relative Risk = 1.0; 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.19) (p = 0.97).

Conclusions

Specialist feed-back in addition to an educational session did not increase the uptake of anticoagulation in patients with AF.

Trial registration

ANZCTRN12611000076976 Retrospectively registered.