Views about integrating smoking cessation treatment within psychological services for patients with common mental illness: A multi‐perspective qualitative study

BackgroundTobacco smoking rates are significantly higher in people with common mental illness compared to those without. Smoking cessation treatment could be offered as part of usual outpatient psychological care, but currently is not.ObjectiveTo understand patient and health care professionals'' views about integrating smoking cessation treatment into outpatient psychological services for common mental illness.DesignQualitative in‐depth interviews, with thematic analysis.ParticipantsEleven Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) psychological wellbeing practitioners (PWPs), six IAPT patients, and six stop smoking advisors were recruited from English smoking cessation, and IAPT services.ResultsPatients reported psychological benefits from smoking, and also described smoking as a form of self‐harm. Stop smoking advisors displayed therapeutic pessimism and stigmatizing attitudes towards helping people with mental illness to quit smoking. PWPs have positive attitudes towards smoking cessation treatment for people with common mental illness. PWPs and patients accept evidence that smoking tobacco may harm mental health, and quitting might benefit mental health. PWPs report expertise in helping people with common mental illness to make behavioural changes in the face of mood disturbances and low motivation. PWPs felt confident in offering smoking cessation treatments to patients, but suggested a caseload reduction may be required to deliver smoking cessation support in IAPT.ConclusionsIAPT appears to be a natural environment for smoking cessation treatment. PWPs may need additional training, and a caseload reduction. Integration of smoking cessation treatment into IAPT services should be tested in a pilot and feasibility study.Patient or public contributionService users and members of the public were involved in study design and interpretation of data.     

巴西SciELO平台国际化发展策略及启示

【目的】 分析母语非英语国家科技期刊出版策略,为国内期刊国际化发展提供借鉴。【方法】 以巴西SciELO平台为例,通过文献调研、平台调研、双语期刊案例调研等方法剖析巴西期刊出版策略。【结果】 作为国际上首个开放出版平台,SciELO平台更多是面向本国期刊质量提升与评估优化、数字化出版、出版语种平衡及国际影响力提升需要而提出的发展策略。【结论】 SciELO平台本身就是一种国际化策略,发挥了“造船出海“的功能,对整体提升巴西期刊国际影响力具有非常重要的作用,其数字出版平台的牵引作用和语种的平衡发展方式值得我国借鉴。     

A Profile of Black and Latino Older Adults Receiving Care in Nursing Homes: 2011–2017

ObjectiveTo identify if disparate trends in the access and use of nursing home (NH) services among Black and Latino older adults compared with White older adults persist. Access was operationalized as the NHs that served Black, Latino, and White residents. Use was operationalized as the utilization of NH services by Black, Latino, and White residents.DesignThis was an observational study analyzing facility-level data from LTCfocus for 2011 to 2017.Setting and ParticipantsAll NH residents present in US NHs participating in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services program on the first Thursday in April in the years 2011 to 2017. NHs with fewer than 4500 bed-days per year are excluded in the LCTfocus dataset. Black, Latino, and White were the racial/ethnic groups of interest.MethodsWe calculated the mean percentage of each racial/ethnic group in NHs (Black, Latino, White) annually along with the number of NHs that provided care for these groups. We conducted a simple trend analysis using ordinary least squares to estimate the change in NH access and use by racial/ethnic group over time.ResultsOur NH sample ranged from 15,564 in 2011 to 14,956 in 2017. Latino residents' use of NHs increased by 20.47% and Black residents increased by 11.42%, whereas there was a 1.36% decrease in White residents’ use of NHs. In this 7-year span, there was a 4.44% and 6.41% decline in the number of NHs that serve any Black and Latino older adults, respectively, compared with a 2.26% decline in NHs that serve only White older adults (access).Conclusions and ImplicationsOur findings reveal a continued disproportionate rise in Black and Latino older adults’ use of NHs while the number of NHs that serve this population have declined. This work can inform federal and state policies to ensure access to long-term care services and supports in the community for all older adults and prevent inappropriate NH closures.     

Abordajes en cirugía tiroidea

Thyroidectomy is the most frequent procedure in endocrine surgery. The conventional approach through a collar incision, as described by Kocher in XIX^th century, has become the “gold standard”. It is continuously evolving in spite of, many years ago, it showed to be safe and efficient with quality standards difficult to beat.Endoscopic and robotic surgery have developed “new approaches” to thyroid in order to improve the cosmetic results, looking even for invisible scars.We have done a thoughtful review of most of them trying to understand their benefits and drawbacks.Currently none of these “new approaches” have been shown to be better than conventional open thyroidectomy beyond offering a better cosmetic result. Besides, only a small percentage of patients can benefit of them. However, most of these approaches will remain if they treat the diseased thyroid and also improve the quality of life of our patients.     

Developing network adequacy standards for VA Community Care

ObjectivesTo inform how the VA should develop and implement network adequacy standards, we convened an expert panel to discuss Community Care Network (CCN) adequacy and how VA might implement network adequacy standards for community care.Data Sources/Study settingData were generated from expert panel ratings and from an audio‐recorded expert panel meeting conducted in Arlington, Virginia, in October 2017.Study DesignWe used a modified Delphi panel process involving one round of expert panel ratings provided by nine experts in network adequacy standards. Expert panel members received a list of network adequacy standard measures used in commercial and government market and were provided a rating form listing a total of 11 measures and characteristics to rate.Data Collection MethodsItems on the rating form were individually discussed during an expert panel meeting between the nine expert panel members and VA Office of Community Care leaders. Attendees addressed discordant views and generated revised or new standards accordingly. Recorded audio data were transcribed to facilitate thematic analysis regarding opportunities and challenges with implementing network adequacy standards in VA Community Care.Principal FindingsThe five highest ranked standards were network directories for Veterans, regular reporting of network adequacy data to VA, maximum wait time/distance standards, minimum ratio of providers to enrolled population, and qualitative assessments of network adequacy. During the expert panel discussion with VA Community Care leaders, opportunities and challenges implementing network adequacy standards were highlighted.ConclusionsOur expert panel shed light on priorities for network adequacy to be implemented under CCN contracts, such as developing comprehensive provider directories for Veterans to use when selecting community providers. Remaining questions focus on whether the VA could reasonably develop and implement network adequacy standards given current Congressional restraints on VA reimbursement to community providers.     

Impact of COVID‐19 on access to healthcare in low‐ and middle‐income countries: Current evidence and future recommendations

The COVID‐19 pandemic continues to be a major public health threat globally and low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) are not an exception. The impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic is far‐reaching on many areas including but not limited to global health security, economic and healthcare delivery with a potential impact on access to healthcare in LMICs. We evaluate the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on access to healthcare in LMICs, as well as plausible strategies that can be put in place to ensure that the delivery of healthcare is not halted. In order to mitigate the devastating effect of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the already weak health systems in LMICs, it is much necessary to reinforce and scale up interventions and proactive measures that will ensure that access to healthcare is not disrupted even in course of the pandemic.