Psychiatric bulletin (2014)最新文献

{"title":"Authors' response.","authors":"Philip J Cowen, Daniel Whiting","doi":"10.1192/pb.38.2.88a","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.38.2.88a","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"88"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/pb.38.2.88a","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32681071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Should psychology be 'positive'? Letting the philosophers speak: Commentary on... Hope, optimism and delusion.","authors":"Femi Oyebode","doi":"10.1192/pb.bp.113.045823","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.113.045823","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This is a brief commentary on the value of optimism in therapy. It draws on the philosophical writings of Schopenhauer and Aristotle. It suggests that the modern preoccupation with optimism may be as extreme as the bleak pessimistic outlook favoured by Schopenhauer. </p>","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"52-3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/pb.bp.113.045823","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32680595","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Agomelatine - is it another reboxetine? Another case of publication bias.","authors":"Sumeet Gupta","doi":"10.1192/pb.38.2.88","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.38.2.88","url":null,"abstract":"I read the special article about agomelatine with interest.1 The authors state that controlled studies have suggested a favourable efficacy and tolerability profile of agomelatine in depression. This statement is not entirely accurate.","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"88"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/pb.38.2.88","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32681070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Research ethics approval and discrimination.","authors":"Louise McCarthy,&nbsp;Vijaykumar Harbishettar,&nbsp;Albert Michael","doi":"10.1192/pb.38.2.89","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.38.2.89","url":null,"abstract":"We read with envy Galappathie et al’s study1 of detained patients’ awareness of the mental health review tribunal (MHRT). We applaud their decision to regard their study as part of service evaluation rather than as a research project requiring National Research Ethics Service Committee (NRESC) approval. \u0000 \u0000We applied for NRESC approval for a study asking patients detained under Section 2 or Section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 about their views on the chances of the MHRT rescinding their detention if they appealed. The crucial question was ‘What do you think are the chances that you will be discharged by the Tribunal if you appeal?’ \u0000 \u0000The NRESC which reviewed the application did not have a mental health patients’ representative, carers’ representative or mental health professional as its member. Therefore, it sought expert opinion from a retired clinical psychologist. The NRESC ruled that ‘the study should not be done in the acute phase of treatment when participants are detained and it would be more appropriate once they have been discharged. This would remove concerns about the ability of the participants to give informed consent whilst under detention and in a vulnerable condition’. \u0000 \u0000We appealed against the decision and our application was referred to another NRESC which also did not have a mental health patients’ representative or carers’ representative, but had a psychologist as a member. We attended the review and explained that we endeavoured to assess detained patients’ views and that post-discharge retrospective assessment would be futile. We argued that the first principle of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 is the presumption of capacity. The General Medical Council guidance also states that one must not assume that a patient lacks capacity to make a decision solely because of their medical condition, including mental illness. We confirmed that patients who did not have capacity to decide whether to take part in the study will not be offered the opportunity to take part. This second NRESC agreed with the first one for the same reasons, that is, detained patients don’t have capacity to decide whether to take part in the study. \u0000 \u0000This is an example of ignorance and consequent stigmatising attitudes held by those in authority, resulting in discrimination against mental health patients, carers and professionals. Members of NRESCs believing that those who are mentally ill lack the capacity to make simple decisions could significantly hamper research into mental illness and perpetuate the myth that psychiatry is the most unscientific medical specialty. Mental health professionals and patient groups may share part of the blame by not representing themselves on NRESCs.","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/pb.38.2.89","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32681074","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Violence risk assessment as a medical intervention: ethical tensions.","authors":"Ashimesh Roychowdhury, Gwen Adshead","doi":"10.1192/pb.bp.113.043315","DOIUrl":"10.1192/pb.bp.113.043315","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Risk assessment differs from other medical interventions in that the welfare of the patient is not the immediate object of the intervention. However, improving the risk assessment process may reduce the chance of risk assessment itself being unjust. We explore the ethical arguments in relation to risk assessment as a medical intervention, drawing analogies, where applicable, with ethical arguments raised by general medical investigations. The article concludes by supporting the structured professional judgement approach as a method of risk assessment that is most consistent with the respect for principles of medical ethics. Recommendations are made for the future direction of risk assessment indicated by ethical theory. </p>","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"75-82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4115407/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32681062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Delayed discharges in an urban in-patient mental health service in England.","authors":"Rob Poole,&nbsp;Alison Pearsall,&nbsp;Tony Ryan","doi":"10.1192/pb.bp.113.043083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.113.043083","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Aims and method To describe the clinical and demographic characteristics of all in-patients experiencing delayed discharge over 3 months in an English urban mental health National Health Service trust. We carried out a cross-sectional case record study with care coordinator questionnaire. Results Overall, 67 in-patients with delayed discharge occupied 18.6% of acute beds. Older in-patients were White, diagnosed with dementia and experienced relatively short admissions. Younger in-patients were often of Black and minority ethnic background with a psychotic diagnosis and long service contact, and sometimes experienced very long admissions. They were similar to a long-stay comparison group. The whole cohort was socially isolated and marginalised, and frequently misused alcohol. Clinical implications People with complex mental health problems can experience long stays in acute care settings. This particularly affects people with psychosis who are isolated in the community. Alcohol misuse is the most common complicating factor. There are insufficient community-oriented rehabilitation services to meet these patients' diverse needs. </p>","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"66-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/pb.bp.113.043083","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32681060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Not everything that counts can be counted and not everything that can be counted counts.","authors":"Salwa Khalil","doi":"10.1192/pb.38.2.86b","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.38.2.86b","url":null,"abstract":"In their excellent paper, Bekas & Michev1 present a sober assessment of the inherent weakness of the Mental Health Clustering Tool and ICD-10 coding. Although clustering has already been used for many years in acute care, what is suitable for acute care is not necessary applicable to psychiatry. We are expected to cluster patients with similar symptoms, needs and disabilities in 21 clusters which are used as the basis for financial funding. \u0000 \u0000However, subjectivity in psychiatry is a fact and it does not really matter how many tools and scales we implement to change this. The chance of subjectivity may be reduced but never eliminated. Diagnosis and formulations vary between clinicians within the same profession and even between members of the same team. One can identify quite easily a sizeable number of patients with an ever-changing diagnosis over a number of admissions. It follows that clustering is not a static tag but a changeable process that ought to be regularly updated. \u0000 \u0000I agree wholeheartedly with Bekas & Michev that the final arbiter should be clinical judgement. It is not uncommon practice for clinicians such as myself to override the cluster concluded by other members of the team, relying on and trusting my clinical judgement.","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"86"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/pb.38.2.86b","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32681065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Unfair playing field.","authors":"Michael Fitzgerald","doi":"10.1192/pb.38.2.87","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.38.2.87","url":null,"abstract":"I fully agree with the change of the name of The Psychiatrist to the Psychiatric Bulletin.1 The phrase ‘unfair playing field’ is very important. For the past 50 years in psychiatric publishing it would appear that there were serious conflicts of interest not declared. For example, an editor and reviewers have reviewed papers where they are competing for research funds in the same areas as the papers submitted. In addition, many of these same people have been on committees deciding on funding for research in the same area as the paper that is being submitted or have other associations with the authors of the paper of one kind or another. Serious conflicts of interest particularly related to the ‘golden circle’ of people who are both editors, submitters of papers and on funding bodies. This controls what is allowed to be published and what topics are allowed to be funded and has damaged research and publication in the past 50 years. In a way it seems as if ‘might is right’ - the mighty being inside the golden publishing circle. It would be interesting for somebody to do a review of publications in psychiatry journals for the past 50 years to see where these conflicts of interest occurred and were undeclared. It is probably a more sociological task.","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/pb.38.2.87","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32681069","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Prevention and Management of Violence: Guidance for Mental Healthcare Professionals","authors":"Matthew S. Tovey","doi":"10.1192/PB.BP.113.045468","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/PB.BP.113.045468","url":null,"abstract":"Prevention and Management of Violence: Guidance for Mental Healthcare Professionals Edited by Masum Khwaja, & Dominic Beer RCPsych Publications, 2013, £20.00 (pb), 144 pp. ISBN: 9781908020956 \u0000\u0000Violence is always a consideration for anyone working in the field of mental health. The remit of this","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 1","pages":"94-95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/PB.BP.113.045468","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66555890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Hope, optimism and delusion.","authors":"Rebecca McGuire-Snieckus","doi":"10.1192/pb.bp.113.044438","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.113.044438","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Optimism is generally accepted by psychiatrists, psychologists and other caring professionals as a feature of mental health. Interventions typically rely on cognitive-behavioural tools to encourage individuals to 'stop negative thought cycles' and to 'challenge unhelpful thoughts'. However, evidence suggests that most individuals have persistent biases of optimism and that excessive optimism is not conducive to mental health. How helpful is it to facilitate optimism in individuals who are likely to exhibit biases of optimism already? By locating the cause of distress at the individual level and 'unhelpful' cognitions, does this minimise wider systemic social and economic influences on mental health? </p>","PeriodicalId":90710,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric bulletin (2014)","volume":"38 2","pages":"49-51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/pb.bp.113.044438","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32680594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}