Motor neuron disease (MND) is a progressive, fatal, neurodegenerative condition that affects motor neurons in the brain and spinal cord, resulting in loss of the ability to move, speak, swallow and breathe. Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) is an acceptance-based behavioural therapy that may be particularly beneficial for people living with MND (plwMND). This qualitative study aimed to explore plwMND’s experiences of receiving adapted ACT, tailored to their specific needs, and therapists’ experiences of delivering it.

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with plwMND who had received up to eight 1:1 sessions of adapted ACT and therapists who had delivered it within an uncontrolled feasibility study. Interviews explored experiences of ACT and how it could be optimised for plwMND. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using framework analysis.

Participants were 14 plwMND and 11 therapists. Data were coded into four over-arching themes: (i) an appropriate tool to navigate the disease course; (ii) the value of therapy outweighing the challenges; (iii) relevance to the individual; and (iv) involving others. These themes highlighted that ACT was perceived to be acceptable by plwMND and therapists, and many participants reported or anticipated beneficial outcomes in the future, despite some therapeutic challenges. They also highlighted how individual factors can influence experiences of ACT, and the potential benefit of involving others in therapy.

Qualitative data supported the acceptability of ACT for plwMND. Future research and clinical practice should address expectations and personal relevance of ACT to optimise its delivery to plwMND.

1. (1) To understand the views of people living with motor neuron disease (plwMND) and therapists on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for people living with this condition.

2. (2) To understand the facilitators of and barriers to ACT for plwMND.

3. (3) To learn whether ACT that has been tailored to meet the specific needs of plwMND needs to be further adapted to potentially increase its acceptability to this population.

Data on associations between inflammation and depressive symptoms largely originate from high income population settings, despite the greatest disease burden in major depressive disorder being attributed to populations in lower-middle income countries (LMICs).

We assessed the prevalence of low-grade inflammation in adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in Pakistan, an LMIC, and investigated associations between peripheral C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and depressive symptoms.

This is a secondary analysis of two randomised controlled trials investigating adjunctive immunomodulatory agents (minocycline and simvastatin) for Pakistani adults with TRD (n = 191). Logistic regression models were built to assess the relationship between pre-treatment CRP (≥ or <3 mg/L) and individual depressive symptoms measured using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Descriptive statistics and regression were used to assess treatment response for inflammation-associated symptoms.

High plasma CRP (≥3 mg/L) was detected in 87% (n = 146) of participants. Early night insomnia (odds ratio 2.33, 95% CI 1.16–5.25), early morning waking (odds ratio 2.65, 95% CI 1.29–6.38) and psychic anxiety (odds ratio 3.79, 95% CI 1.39–21.7) were positively associated, while gastrointestinal (odds ratio 0.38, 95% CI 0.14–0.86) and general somatic symptoms (odds ratio 0.34, 95% CI 0.14–0.74) were negatively associated with inflammation. Minocycline, but not simvastatin, improved symptoms positively associated with inflammation.

The prevalence of inflammation in this LMIC sample with TRD was higher than that reported in high income countries. Insomnia and anxiety symptoms may represent possible targets for personalised treatment with immunomodulatory agents in people with elevated CRP. These findings require replication in independent clinical samples.

The field of healthcare epidemiology is increasingly focused on identifying, characterizing, and addressing social determinants of health (SDOH) to address inequities in healthcare quality. To identify evidence gaps, we examined recent systematic reviews examining the association of race, ethnicity, and SDOH with inpatient quality measures.

We searched Medline via OVID for English language systematic reviews from 2010 to 2022 addressing race, ethnicity, or SDOH domains and inpatient quality measures in adults using specific topic questions. We imported all citations to Covidence (www.covidence.org, Veritas Health Innovation) and removed duplicates. Two blinded reviewers assessed all articles for inclusion in 2 phases: title/abstract, then full-text review. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer.

Of 472 systematic reviews identified, 39 were included. Of these, 23 examined all-cause mortality; 6 examined 30-day readmission rates; 4 examined length of stay, 4 examined falls, 2 examined surgical site infections (SSIs) and one review examined risk of venous thromboembolism. The most evaluated SDOH measures were sex (n = 9), income and/or employment status (n = 9), age (n = 6), race and ethnicity (n = 6), and education (n = 5). No systematic reviews assessed medication use errors or healthcare-associated infections. We found very limited assessment of other SDOH measures such as economic stability, neighborhood, and health system access.

A limited number of systematic reviews have examined the association of race, ethnicity and SDOH measures with inpatient quality measures, and existing reviews highlight wide variability in reporting. Future systematic evaluations of SDOH measures are needed to better understand the relationships with inpatient quality measures.

Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) indication-based classification system is the World Health Organization (WHO) drug classification system and it is widely used in clinical and researh practice, however there has been questions around the scientific base of this (1, 2). Neuroscience-based Nomenclature (NbN) has been developed by representatives from 5 international organizations, with specific expertise in psychopharmacology, to address the issues around neuropsychopharmacological drug classification and improve the focus on pharmacological domains and mode of action:

ECNP – European College of Neuropsychopharmacology

ACNP – American College of Neuropsychopharmacology

AsCNP – Asian College of Neuropsychopharmacology

CINP – International College of Neuropsychopharmacology

IUPHAR – International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology

References:

1. Nutt DJ. Beyond psychoanaleptics - can we improve antidepressant drug nomenclature? [published correction appears in J Psychopharmacol. 2009 Sept;23(7):861]. J Psychopharmacol. 2009;23(4):343-345. doi:10.1177/0269881109105498

2. Zohar J, Stahl S, Moller HJ, et al. A review of the current nomenclature for psychotropic agents and an introduction to the Neuroscience-based Nomenclature. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2015;25(12):2318-2325. doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2015.08.019

As NbN is a novel classification system that can be used as a teaching tool as well as for other purposes, we aimed to understand the experience, views and needs of the psychiatric trainees and early career psychiatrists who will shape the future of psychiatry, around drug classification systems.

The ethical clearance of the study was obtained from King’s College London. We prepared an online survey (https://forms.gle/FCSdVTFH4U5QNn5t8) with a multinational group of early career pscyhiatrists who met through the CINP and EFPT, and test-run the survey with a small group of psychiatric trainees. The online survey was then disseminated via emailing lists and groups of early careers psychiatrists as well as through social media.

At the time of this abstract submission, the data collection is ongoing. Results will include analyses of the experience with different drug classifcations systems, awareness, views and attainment of NbN, stratified according to the demographic data (country, careers status, main work setting).

The findings from this study will shed light on the views and needs of early career psychiatrists on the topic from clinical and academic aspects, a previously unexplored perspective on drug classification systems. The findings can inform the planning of various strategies to address areas to improve the use and teaching of these tools.

None Declared

Digital Mental Health Interventions (DMHIs) that meet the definition of a medical device are regulated by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in the UK. The MHRA uses procedures that were originally developed for pharmaceuticals to assess the safety of DMHIs. There is recognition that this may not be ideal, as is evident by an ongoing consultation for reform led by the MHRA and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

The aim of this study was to generate an experts’ consensus on how the medical regulatory method used for assessing safety could best be adapted for DMHIs.

An online Delphi study containing three rounds was conducted with an international panel of 20 experts with experience/knowledge in the field of UK digital mental health.

Sixty-four items were generated, of which 41 achieved consensus (64%). Consensus emerged around ten recommendations, falling into five main themes: Enhancing the quality of adverse events data in DMHIs; Re-defining serious adverse events for DMHIs; Reassessing short-term symptom deterioration in psychological interventions as a therapeutic risk; Maximising the benefit of the Yellow Card Scheme; and Developing a harmonised approach for assessing the safety of psychological interventions in general.

The implementation of the recommendations provided by this consensus could improve the assessment of safety of DMHIs, making them more effective in detecting and mitigating risk.

Children with CHD or born very preterm are at risk for brain dysmaturation and poor neurodevelopmental outcomes. Yet, studies have primarily investigated neurodevelopmental outcomes of these groups separately.

To compare neurodevelopmental outcomes and parent behaviour ratings of children born term with CHD to children born very preterm.

A clinical research sample of 181 children (CHD [n = 81]; very preterm [≤32 weeks; n = 100]) was assessed at 18 months.

Children with CHD and born very preterm did not differ on Bayley-III cognitive, language, or motor composite scores, or on expressive or receptive language, or on fine motor scaled scores. Children with CHD had lower ross motor scaled scores compared to children born very preterm (p = 0.047). More children with CHD had impaired scores (<70 SS) on language composite (17%), expressive language (16%), and gross motor (14%) indices compared to children born very preterm (6%; 7%; 3%; ps < 0.05). No group differences were found on behaviours rated by parents on the Child Behaviour Checklist (1.5–5 years) or the proportion of children with scores above the clinical cutoff. English as a first language was associated with higher cognitive (p = 0.004) and language composite scores (p < 0.001). Lower median household income and English as a second language were associated with higher total behaviour problems (ps < 0.05).

Children with CHD were more likely to display language and motor impairment compared to children born very preterm at 18 months. Outcomes were associated with language spoken in the home and household income.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, research organizations accelerated adoption of technologies that enable remote participation. Now, there’s a pressing need to evaluate current decentralization practices and develop appropriate research, education, and operations infrastructure. The purpose of this study was to examine current adoption of decentralization technologies in a sample of clinical research studies conducted by academic research organizations (AROs).

The setting was three data coordinating centers in the U.S. These centers initiated coordination of 44 clinical research studies during or after 2020, with national recruitment and enrollment, and entailing coordination between one and one hundred sites. We determined the decentralization technologies used in these studies.

We obtained data for 44/44 (100%) trials coordinated by the three centers. Three technologies have been adopted across nearly all studies (98–100%): eIRB, eSource, and Clinical Trial Management Systems. Commonly used technologies included e-Signature (32/44, 73%), Online Payments Portals (26/44, 59%), ePROs (23/44, 53%), Interactive Response Technology (22/44, 50%), Telemedicine (19/44, 43%), and eConsent (18/44, 41%). Wearables (7/44,16%) and Online Recruitment Portals (5/44,11%) were less common. Rarely utilized technologies included Direct-to-Patient Portals (1/44, 2%) and Home Health Nurse Portals (1/44, 2%).

All studies incorporated some type of decentralization technology, with more extensive adoption than found in previous research. However, adoption may be strongly influenced by institution-specific IT and informatics infrastructure and support. There are inherent needs, responsibilities, and challenges when incorporating decentralization technology into a research study, and AROs must ensure that infrastructure and informatics staff are adequate.