Psychosis is often a traumatic experience that can lead to significant suffering. However, people may also experience posttraumatic growth following psychosis. Posttraumatic growth refers to the positive changes that people experience following a struggle with an adversarial event and has been shown to occur in at least five domains, including a greater appreciation for life; improved relationships with others; greater personal strengths; new life possibilities and spiritual/existential growth. Studies have shown that mental health services can play a key role in facilitating posttraumatic growth. However, there are no recommendations that clinicians can follow to best support posttraumatic growth following psychosis specifically. Without guidance, clinicians risk invalidating people’s experiences of, or providing improper support for, posttraumatic growth. To address this knowledge gap, we reflect on current research and clinical guidelines to recommend ways that clinicians can support posttraumatic growth following psychosis.

Healthcare systems account for a substantial proportion of global carbon emissions and contribute to wider environmental degradation. This scoping review aimed to summarize the evidence currently available on incorporation of environmental and sustainability considerations into health technology assessments (HTAs) and guidelines to support the National In stitute for Health and Care Excellence and analogous bodies in other jurisdictions developing theirown methods and processes. Overall, 7,653 articles were identified, of which 24 were included in this review and split into three key areas – HTA (10 studies), healthcare guidelines (4 studies), and food and dietary guidelines (10 studies). Methodological reviews discussed the pros and cons of different approaches to integrate environmental considerations into HTAs, including adjustments to conventional cost-utility analysis (CUA), cost–benefit analysis, and multicriteria decision analysis. The case studies illustrated the challenges of putting this into practice, such as lack of disaggregated data to evaluate the impact of single technologies and difficulty in conducting thorough life cycle assessments that consider the full environmental effects. Evidence was scant on the incorporation of environmental impacts in clinical practice and public health guidelines. Food and dietary guidelines used adapted CUA based on life cycle assessments, simulation modeling, and qualitative judgments made by expert panels. There is uncertainty on how HTA and guideline committees will handle trade-offs between health and environment, especially when balancing environmental harms that fall largely on society with health benefits for individuals. Further research is warranted to enable integration of environmental considerations into HTA and clinical and public health guidelines.

The importance of patient and public involvement (PPI) is recognized by agencies involved in health technology assessment (HTA) and guideline development. However, a comprehensive overview of the underlying PPI principles, values, strategies, and frameworks is lacking. This scoping review aimed to summarize the available evidence on principles, values, frameworks, and strategies underpinning PPI carried out by agencies involved in HTA and guideline development. A total of twelve records were included, of which four referred to guidelines and eight to HTA. Overall, this review demonstrated a lack of consistency in the definition and application of the concepts of values and principles to PPI in the context of guideline development and HTA. There was significant overlap between values and principles, with some broad themes emerging, such as representation, transparency, relevance, equity, fairness, and reconciling different types of knowledge. Frameworks were typically based on the stages of guideline development or HTA, despite heterogeneity in how stages were labeled and described. Strategies were also mapped to the stages of guideline development and HTA and varied substantially depending on the context and setting. Both strategies and frameworks demonstrated patients and the public can be involved, albeit to a variable extent, throughout the stages of guideline development and HTA. However, frameworks often failed to explicitly link the values and principles with the HTA and guideline development stages through actionable PPI strategies. Further research is warranted to better understand the values, principles, and frameworks underpinning PPI in guideline development and HTA.

There is currently a lack of clinical research that would strongly support the application of CBT in the treatment of narcolepsy type 1. Despite that, there are several guidelines that suggest some techniques should be routinely applied. Currently, there is still a lack of results on what to do with patients who have comorbid sleep and psychiatric disorders or other psychosocial comorbidities and problems. This case study concerns a 27-year-old female who had narcolepsy type 1 and history of sleep, psychosocial, and psychiatric problems. Her main problems included cataplexy, daily tiredness and sleepiness, a problem with daily physical activity, and problems in her psychosocial functioning. The patient received 7 session of CBT treatment based on recommended techniques for patients with hypersomnia. Self-reported measure of sleep, anxiety, and depression were collected at the start and 1-month post-treatment. Objective psychological measures recorded positive changes in post-treatment assessment of CBT effect on her sleep pattern, significant reduction of cataplexy, depressive and anxiety symptoms, daily activity, and tiredness during the day.

In a recent issue of BJPsych Open, McPherson & Hengartner (see https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2019.65) reviewed 11 trials examining psychological and pharmacological treatment outcomes for chronic or treatment-resistant depression. They concluded that when assessed in the long term, antidepressants become less effective whereas psychological therapies become more effective. We argue that the evidence does not support this; indeed, most of the studies reviewed do not directly compare antidepressant with psychological therapy treatments and there is little consistency between them in terms of populations and interventions examined. The issue of long-term outcomes is key for optimising clinical guidelines and deserves more intensive research and scrutiny to improve patient response in routine practice.

Guideline methods to develop recommendations dedicate most effort around organising discovery and corroboration knowledge following the evidence-based medicine (EBM) framework. Guidelines typically use a single dimension of information, and generally discard contextual evidence and formal expert knowledge and consumer's experiences in the process. In recognition of the limitations of guidelines in complex cases, complex interventions and systems research, there has been significant effort to develop new tools, guides, resources and structures to use alongside EBM methods of guideline development. In addition to these advances, a new framework based on the philosophy of science is required. Guidelines should be defined as implementation decision support tools for improving the decision-making process in real-world practice and not only as a procedure to optimise the knowledge base of scientific discovery and corroboration. A shift from the model of the EBM pyramid of corroboration of evidence to the use of broader multi-domain perspective graphically depicted as ‘Greek temple’ could be considered. This model takes into account the different stages of scientific knowledge (discovery, corroboration and implementation), the sources of knowledge relevant to guideline development (experimental, observational, contextual, expert-based and experiential); their underlying inference mechanisms (deduction, induction, abduction, means-end inferences) and a more precise definition of evidence and related terms. The applicability of this broader approach is presented for the development of the Canadian Consensus Guidelines for the Primary Care of People with Developmental Disabilities.

Introduction: The 2011 Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA) Clinical Practice Guidelines were developed in order to help physicians manage hyperglycemic emergencies in the emergency department (ED), including diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state (HHS). The goal of this study was to determine physician attitudes towards these guidelines and to identify potential barriers to their implementation in the ED. Methods: We distributed an online, cross sectional survey to 500 randomly selected members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) who were currently practicing physicians. A total of 3 email notifications were distributed on days 1, 7 and 14. The survey consisted of 23 questions relating to physician management of DKA and HHS in the ED. The primary outcome was overall physician familiarity and usage of the guidelines using a 7-point Likert scale. Secondary outcomes included physician attitudes towards the guidelines as well as any perceived barriers to their implementation in the ED. Simple descriptive statistics were used to illustrate the survey results. Results: The survey response rate was 62.2% (311/500) with the following participant characteristics: male (62.6%), CCFP(EM) training (46.1%) and working in major academic centers (50.5%). The overall awareness rate of the CDA guidelines was 22.9% (95% CI = 18.3%, 27.5%). 58.9% (95% CI = 53.3%, 64.3%) reported the CDA guidelines being useful. The most frequently reported barriers to CDA guideline implementation were concerns about education issues (56.0%), lack of time and disruption of flow (23.9%), staffing and human resource issues (26.7%) and poor policy adherence (25.5%). Physician’s ideal changes to optimize the management of these patients included improved coordination for follow-up with family physicians (79.9%), increased diabetes education for patients (73.9%) and increased availability to diabetes specialists (47.5%). Conclusion: In this study, although Canadian ED physicians were generally supportive of the CDA guidelines, many were unaware that these guidelines existed and barriers to their implementation were reported. Future research should focus on strategies to standardize DKA and HHS management by ensuring physician awareness and education to ensure the highest quality of patient care.

This study aims to: 1) assess the proportion of General Practioners (GPs) who are aware of or who have read the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE; 2005a) guidelines for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), 2) compare this with the proportion of other mental health disorders found by previous research and 3) establish the prevalence of OCD in primary care. Questionnaires were sent to all GPs (n = 795) and practice managers (n = 157) in Berkshire and Buckinghamshire, South East England. These contained 19 questions and took 5 min to complete. After the first set of responses, larger practices were visited and telephoned to encourage further responses. The response rates were 10.1% from GPs and 19.1% from practice managers. In all, 48.7% of the GPs were aware of the NICE guidelines for OCD and 30.3% reported that they had read them – higher than for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, but lower than for depression. Of registered patients, 0.2% were diagnosed with OCD, lower than the 1.1% found in epidemiological studies.

Aims – The aims of the SIEP-DIRECT'S Project (DIscrepancy betweenRoutine practice andEvidence in psychiatricCommunityTreatments onSchizophrenia) are: 1) To evaluate the appropriateness of the NICE guidelines for schizophrenia in Italian Departments of Mental Health; 2) to develop and to test a set of SIEP indicators, based on the NICE recommendations, useful to evaluate their real application in mental health services. Methods – Based on the NICE recommendations, 103 indicators have been developed, some of them qualitative and the rest quantitative. These indicators investigate five different areas: 14 indicators concern the common elements in all phases of mental health care; 11 the treatment of first episode; 24 the crisis treatment; 41 the recovery promotion; 13 the urgency, including management of violent behaviours and fast soothing. After a pilot study conducted in 2 community mental health services, the indicators were tested in 19 Italian Departments of Mental Health, to obtain a self-evaluation of the quality of care and to verify the application of NICE recommendations in the clinical routine of these Services. Data for the self-evaluation have been obtained from the DSM'ls psychiatric informative system and from the Direction of the local health authorities or of the DSM. Moreover, for some indicators, information has been gathered from the clinical records, and by means of questionnaires administered to a sample of patients and relatives. Finally, “multidisciplinary” (i.e. involving different types of professionals) or “specialized” (i.e. involving only psychiatrists) focus groups have assessed the degree of similarity between practice and recommendation for 33 indicators. Finally, the focus group methodology has been applied in all services with the aim to judge the appropriateness of each NICE recommendation in the context of the Italian Departments of Mental Health. Results and Conclusions – Most NICE recommendations have been considered useful and appropriated to measure quality of care in the context of the Italian services. The SIEP indicators have been easily used by the services participating in the DIRECT's Project. The self-evaluation process has provided several data of great relevance to improve the quality of care for schizophrenia and implement clinical guidelines in Italy.

Declaration of Interest: None.

This paper describes the process of preparing a Clinical Guideline for “NICE”, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the United Kingdom. The procedure involves the group appointed to prepare the guideline relating to the various “stakeholders” who have an interest on the one hand, and satisfying the fairly demanding standards set by NICE on the other. The strengths and limitations of the approach based on evidence based medicine are discussed.

This paper discusses some key aspects of the debate on the difficulties of incorporating scientific evidence into the daily work of clinicians in mental health services (MHS). It highlights the topics of: the utility of guidelines in this field, the ethical principles that should guide their utilisation, their limitations, obstacles impeding the diffusion of guidelines in psychiatry, and strategies that can be useful for overcoming the barriers to guideline implementation. The SIEP-DIRECT's ((DIscrepancy between Routine practice and Evidence in psychiatric Community Treatments on Schizophrenia) Project's potential role in fostering this advancement is discussed in detail. This Project developed a set of 103 indicators that operationalised the NICE clinical guidelines for schizophrenia recommendations and tested them in 19 MHS in Italy. A multi-step design was used to assess recommendation and indicator acceptability in the Italian context; provide an assessment of any current discrepancies between routine practice and guideline recommendations in the treatment of schizophrenia; and understand the reasons for any discrepancies that might emerge. This process, moreover, was instrumental in keeping the debate arising during conduction of this Project far from the excesses of hostility - and excesses of “bright-eyed enthusiasm” - that frequently influence discussion on topic. This Project therefore showed potential to serve in the search for a happy medium, that can facilitate the pursuit of a fundamental advancement in guideline implementation in mental health services.

Declaration of Interest: None.

Aims – To highlight the major discrepancies that emerged between evidence and routine practice in the framework of the SIEP-DIRECT's Project (DIscrepancy between Routine practice and Evidence in psychiatric Community Treatments on Schizophrenia ). The Project was conducted in 19 Italian mental health services (MHS), with the aims of: a) evaluating the appropriateness of the NICE Guidelines for Schizophrenia in the Italian context, b) developing and testing a set of 103 indicators that operationalised preferred clinical practice requirements according to the NICE Guidelines, and c) evaluating their actual application in Italian MHSs. Methods – The indicators investigated five different areas: common elements in all phases of schizophrenia; first episode treatment; crisis treatment; promoting recovery; the aggressive behaviour management. Results – The NICE recommendations examined were judged in most instances to be appropriate to the Italian MHS context, and the indicators fairly easy to use. The more severe and frequently encountered evidence-practice discrepancies were: lack of written material, guidelines, and information to be systematically provided to users; lack of intervention monitoring and evaluation; difficulty in implementingspecific and structured forms of intervention; difficulty in considering patients' family members as figures requiring targeted support themselves and who should also be regularly involved in the patient care process. Conclusions – The key actions to be undertaken to favour implementation of evidence-based routine practices are: focussing on mental illness onset and family support/involvement in care; planning training activities aimed at achieving specific treatment goals; encouraging MHS participation in evaluation activities; identifying thresholds for guideline application and promoting specific guideline implementation actions; and activating decision making and resource allocationprocesses that rely more strictly on evidence and epidemiological assessment. These considerations are of value for rethinking the model of community psychiatry in Italy as well as in other countries.

Declaration of Interest: None.

Aims – This paper aims at presenting the most significant results emerging from the work carried out by the focus groups of the multi-centre Project SIEP-DIRECT's. The Project is aimed at assessing the existing discrepancies between the evidence-based NICE guidelines for schizophrenia and the usual practices of care given by Italian mental health services. Each focus group was requested to give an evaluation on: a) appropriateness of the English NICE guidelines in the context of the Italian mental health services; b) clarity and usefulness of the 103 indicators developed on the basis of the NICE recommendations to measure their level of application within the services. Methods - In each of the 19 mental health departments or psychiatric services participating in the Project there were organized “multidisciplinary” focus groups and “specialistic” focus groups. The former included, amongst others, professional operators of the mental health services, patients, their relatives, representatives of patient organizations and general practitioners. They examined the recommendations and indicators upon which the participants could express their opinion or judgment based on their knowledge, experience or information in their possession. The latter group, composed only of psychiatrists, examined the recommendations and indicators relative to pharmacological treatments that regarded the specific competences of their professional category. Results – Most NICE recommendations seemed appropriate to the working context of the Italian services. However, some perplexity emerged as regards specific organizational models of the services, such as the specific services for psychotic onsets or the assertive outreach teams, which were believed not to be strictly pertinent to the traditional organization of mental health care in our Country. There were also some criticisms regarding the cognitive-behavioural treatments which the NICE Guidelines recommend as the principle psychotherapeutic option for patients with schizophrenia, since in many Italian services, when the use of psychological interventions are needed, the tendency is to prefer interventions based on psychodynamic theories. The SIEP indicators were generally held to be clear and acceptable. Conclusions – In the view of the focus groups, the NICE guidelines are on the whole useful and suitable for orientating the services in the choice of more efficacious practices in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Moreover, the results obtained legitimate the use of the set of SIEP indicators for the evaluation of good practices and the quality of care offered by Italian services. Finally, the use of focus groups delines to a different context as well as the verification of the comprehensibility and applicability of SIEP indicators.

Declaration of Interest: None.

Aims – To evaluate the quality of psychiatric care in Italian community-based services and the discrepancy between real practices and NICE recommendations for the treatment of schizophrenia concerning the elements common to all phases of care and the first episode of psychosis. Methods – Data concerning 14 indicators on common aspects of care in all phases and 11 indicators concerning psychosis onset, drawn from NICE Recommendations, were collected in 19 Departments of Mental Health. Results – An optimistic attitude seems to prevail in the staff in all phases of care, while remarkable discrepancies between service practice and recommendations have been found in relation to systematic assessment, availability of informative leaflets and support to relatives. Concerning the treatment of first episode, a lack of specific services and differentiated activities, and paucity of practices based on specific guidelines has been detected. However, Italian community based services proved to have a good capacity to provide help quickly to those seeking help for a psychotic onset, to maintain regular contact with them in the subsequent year, and provide pharmacological treatment reasonably in line with the scientific evidence. Instead, little specific support is provided to the relatives. Conclusions – The results show critical points concerning capacity of assessment and treatment standardization, in all aspects of care and specifically in the treatment for the first episode. Differentiation of activities specifically dedicated to the patients at their first episode should be promoted as well as strategies to support relatives in a more specific way.

Declaration of Interest: none.

Aims – The aim of this work is to present the main discrepancies, as evidenced by the SIEP-DIRECT's Project, between the evidence-based NICE guidelines for schizophrenia and the usual practices of the Italian mental health services in order to promote the recovery of patients with schizophrenia. Methods – Starting from the main NICE recommendations on recovery promotion, 41 indicators were developed. These were experimented in 19 participating Italian Mental Health Departments (MHD) or Psychiatric Services through self-evaluation of the activities carried out to promote patient recovery with the aim of assessing the level of adherence to the recommendations. The data required by most of the indicators were obtained from the psychiatric informative system or from the Direction of the MHD. Moreover, specific research was carried out on the clinical records and on representative patient samples. Furthermore, for 14 indicators, there was requested an assessment by the part of “multidisciplinary” or “specialistic” focus groups who then attributed a score according to a defined “ad hoc” scale. Results – According to the data obtained, although the mental health services seem to care about the physical condition of their patients, they do not routinely examine principle parameters such as blood pressure, glycaemia etc., and collaboration with general practitioners is often complex or not uniformly practiced. Most psychiatrists and psychologists possess the basic communication skills but not enough competences in cognitive-behavioural treatments; such treatments, and every other form of structured individual psychotherapy, are seldom carried out and seem to have become marginal activities within the Services. Also family psycho-educational interventions are under-used. The Services are very active in the care of multi-problem schizophrenia patients, who make up a large percentage (almost a quarter, on average) of the patients in their care. These patients are offered specific and integrated treatment plans with the involvement of other health services and social agencies operating in the territory. The strategies adopted by the services for the pharmacological treatment in the prevention of relapses and for patients with frequent crises or with treatment-resistant schizophrenia are all in line with the NICE recommendations. Finally, the Services promote activities of vocational training and supported employment, but the outcomes of these are often unsatisfactory. Conclusions – The results of the study show a picture of the Italian mental health services with bright yet also dark areas as regards recovery promotion activities. The Services seem to guarantee adequate pharmacological evidence-based treatments, an integrated assistance and good management of multi-problem patients. They have difficulty, however, with respect to the monitoring of the physical health of the patients, psychotherapeutic activities, including those for families, and the promotion of supported employment. Moreover, they still show problems regarding the structuring and formalizing of care processes. To improve this situation, they should make greater use of professional guidelines, protocols and written procedures.

Declaration of Interest: None.