Infection control measures like contact precautions may conflict with patient-centered palliative care principles, but their efficacy and harms in this context remain understudied. This review evaluates how contact precautions affect quality of life, social connectedness, and infection control efficacy in palliative care.

Systematic scoping review.

Palliative care settings (eg, palliative care units and hospices)

Adults and children receiving palliative care, with no restrictions on age or comorbidity.

English-language studies on contact precautions in palliative care were included. Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid Embase were searched from inception to December 20, 2024, using terms related to antimicrobial resistance, contact precautions, and palliative care. No publication type or status restrictions were applied. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework and followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines.

Fifteen studies were included, primarily from Germany (73%) and using qualitative methods (80%). Most focused on patients in palliative care units or hospices, though geographic and methodological limitations restrict generalizability. Common challenges included fear, loneliness, disrupted intimacy, and inconsistent protocols. Contact precautions were often bundled with other infection prevention interventions, limiting the ability to assess their specific impact. Terminology varied widely. No study directly evaluated the efficacy of contact precautions in reducing antimicrobial-resistant organism (ARO) transmission, though one pediatric study reported liberal protocols and no nosocomial ARO infections.

A case-by-case approach is needed to balance infection control with patient dignity and quality of life. Consistent terminology and more robust, mixed-methods research are essential to inform evidence-based protocols in diverse settings.

Alleviation of symptom severity for major depressive disorder (MDD) is known to be associated with a lagged improvement of functioning. Pharmacotherapy guidelines support algorithms for MDD treatment. However, it is currently unclear whether concordance with guidelines influences functional recovery. A guideline concordance algorithm (GCA-8) was used to measure this pathway in a naturalistic clinical setting.

Data from 1403 adults (67% female, 84% non-Hispanic/Latino White, mean age of 43 years) with nonpsychotic MDD from the Penn State Psychiatry Clinical Assessment and Rating Evaluation System registry (visits from 02/01/2015 to 04/13/2021) were evaluated. Multivariable linear regression measured associations between GCA-8 and World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS) scores. Mediation by MDD symptom severity using the Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-9) was also evaluated.

This study found a statistically significant improvement in WHODAS scores (functioning) between baseline and final measures (−2 points, P < .001) within one year. A one standard deviation increase in the GCA-8 score was associated with a 0.48-point reduction in mean disability score (total effect; P = .02) with significant mediation by the change in MDD symptom severity (coefficient = −0.51, P < .001) and a nonsignificant natural direct effect of the GCA-8 independent of PHQ-9 change (coefficient = −0.02, P = .92).

Higher pharmacotherapy guideline concordance is associated with better functioning for MDD patients; this association likely occurs through improvement in MDD symptom severity rather than directly.

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is the leading cause of disability globally, with moderate heritability and well-established socio-environmental risk factors. Genetic studies have been mostly restricted to European settings, with polygenic scores (PGS) demonstrating low portability across diverse global populations.

This study examines genetic architecture, polygenic prediction, and socio-environmental correlates of MDD in a family-based sample of 10 032 individuals from Nepal with array genotyping data. We used genome-based restricted maximum likelihood to estimate heritability, applied S-LDXR to estimate the cross-ancestry genetic correlation between Nepalese and European samples, and modeled PGS trained on a GWAS meta-analysis of European and East Asian ancestry samples.

We estimated the narrow-sense heritability of lifetime MDD in Nepal to be 0.26 (95% CI 0.18–0.34, p = 8.5 × 10−6). Our analysis was underpowered to estimate the cross-ancestry genetic correlation (rg = 0.26, 95% CI −0.29 to 0.81). MDD risk was associated with higher age (beta = 0.071, 95% CI 0.06–0.08), female sex (beta = 0.160, 95% CI 0.15–0.17), and childhood exposure to potentially traumatic events (beta = 0.050, 95% CI 0.03–0.07), while neither the depression PGS (beta = 0.004, 95% CI −0.004 to 0.01) or its interaction with childhood trauma (beta = 0.007, 95% CI −0.01 to 0.03) were strongly associated with MDD.

Estimates of lifetime MDD heritability in this Nepalese sample were similar to previous European ancestry samples, but PGS trained on European data did not predict MDD in this sample. This may be due to differences in ancestry-linked causal variants, differences in depression phenotyping between the training and target data, or setting-specific environmental factors that modulate genetic effects. Additional research among under-represented global populations will ensure equitable translation of genomic findings.

To examine the effectiveness of Self-Help Plus (SH+) as an intervention for alleviating stress levels and mental health problems among healthcare workers.

This was a prospective, two-arm, unblinded, parallel-designed randomised controlled trial. Participants were recruited at all levels of medical facilities within all municipal districts of Guangzhou. Eligible participants were adult healthcare workers experiencing psychological stress (10-item Perceived Stress Scale scores of ≥15) but without serious mental health problems or active suicidal ideation. A self-help psychological intervention developed by the World Health Organization in alleviating psychological stress and preventing the development of mental health problems. The primary outcome was psychological stress, assessed at the 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, insomnia, positive affect (PA) and self-kindness assessed at the 3-month follow-up.

Between November 2021 and April 2022, 270 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to either SH+ (n = 135) or the control group (n = 135). The SH+ group had significantly lower stress at the 3-month follow-up (b = −1.23, 95% CI = −2.36, −0.10, p = 0.033) compared to the control group. The interaction effect indicated that the intervention effect in reducing stress differed over time (b = −0.89, 95% CI = −1.50, −0.27, p = 0.005). Analysis of the secondary outcomes suggested that SH+ led to statistically significant improvements in most of the secondary outcomes, including depression, insomnia, PA and self-kindness.

This is the first known randomised controlled trial ever conducted to improve stress and mental health problems among healthcare workers experiencing psychological stress in a low-resource setting. SH+ was found to be an effective strategy for alleviating psychological stress and reducing symptoms of common mental problems. SH+ has the potential to be scaled-up as a public health strategy to reduce the burden of mental health problems in healthcare workers exposed to high levels of stress.