Dropout from healthcare interventions can negatively affect patients and healthcare providers through impaired trust in the healthcare system and ineffective use of resources. Research on this topic is still largely missing on refugees and asylum seekers. The current study aimed to characterize predictors for dropout in the Mental Health in Refugees and Asylum Seekers (MEHIRA) study, one of the largest multicentered controlled trials investigating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a nationwide stepped and collaborative care model.

Predictors were multiply imputed and selected for descriptive modelling using backward elimination. The final variable set was entered into logistic regression.

The overall dropout rate was 41,7%. Dropout was higher in participants in group therapy (p = 0.001; OR = 10.7), with larger satisfaction with social relationships (p = 0.017; OR = 1.87), with difficulties in maintaining personal relationships (p = 0.005; OR = 4.27), and with higher depressive symptoms (p = 0.029; OR = 1.05). Participants living in refugee accommodation (p = 0.040; OR = 0.45), with a change in social status (p = 0.008; OR = 0.67) and with conduct (p = 0.020; OR = 0.24) and emotional problems (p = 0.013; OR = 0.31) were significantly less likely to drop out of treatment.

Overall, the outcomes of this study suggest that predictors assessing social relationships, social status, and living conditions should be considered as topics of psychological treatment to increase adherence and as predictors for future research studies (including treatment type).

Against the background of missing culturally sensitive mental health care services for refugees, we developed a group intervention (Empowerment) for refugees at level 3 within the stratified Stepped and Collaborative Care Model of the project Mental Health in Refugees and Asylum Seekers (MEHIRA). We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of the Empowerment group intervention with its focus on psychoeducation, stress management, and emotion regulation strategies in a culturally sensitive context for refugees with affective disorders compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU).

At level 3 of the MEHIRA project, 149 refugees and asylum seekers with clinically relevant depressive symptoms were randomized to the Empowerment group intervention or TAU. Treatment comprised 16 therapy sessions conducted over 12 weeks. Effects were measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MÅDRS). Further scales included assessed emotional distress, self-efficacy, resilience, and quality of life.

Intention-to-treat analyses show significant cross-level interactions on both self-rated depressive symptoms (PHQ-9; F(1,147) = 13.32, p < 0.001) and clinician-rated depressive symptoms (MÅDRS; F(1,147) = 6.91, p = 0.01), indicating an improvement in depressive symptoms from baseline to post-intervention in the treatment group compared to the control group. The effect sizes for both scales were moderate (d = 0.68, 95% CI 0.21–1.15 for PHQ-9 and d = 0.51, 95% CI 0.04–0.99 for MÅDRS).

In the MEHIRA project comparing an SCCM approach versus TAU, the Empowerment group intervention at level 3 showed effectiveness for refugees with moderately severe depressive symptoms.

Meditation is commonly implemented in psychological therapies since the ‘third wave’ of cognitive–behavioural therapy has increased the focus on mindfulness-based interventions. Although extensive research literature demonstrates its benefits, little is known about potential adverse effects.

The aim of this study is to report the prevalence, type and severity of particularly unpleasant meditation-related experiences in the largest cross-sectional study on this topic to date, with 1370 regular meditators.

The participants were asked whether they ever encountered particularly unpleasant experiences as a result of their meditation experience. For the first time, the type and severity of those experiences were assessed and the association with several predictors, such as pre-existing mental disorders, were explored via logistic and linear regression.

Similar to previous studies, 22% of participants (95% CI 20–24) reported having encountered unpleasant meditation-related experiences, and 13% of participants (95% CI 3–5) reported experiences that were categorised as adverse. Those were mostly of affective, somatic and cognitive nature. Unpleasant meditation-related experiences were more likely to occur in participants with pre-existing mental illnesses (P = 0.000, 95% CI 1.25–2.12).

This study demonstrates that unpleasant meditation-related experiences are prevalent among meditators and, to a relevant extent, severe enough to warrant further scientific inquiry. Longitudinal studies are needed to examine whether the unpleasant meditation-related experiences are merely negative and thus should be avoided, or are an inherent part of the contemplative path.

We hypothesized that healthcare workers (HCWs) with high-risk exposures outside the healthcare system would have less asymptomatic coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) disease and more symptoms than those without such exposures.

A longitudinal point prevalence study was conducted during August 17–September 4, 2020 (period 1) and during December 2–23, 2020 (period 2).

Community based teaching health system.

All HCWs were invited to participate. Among HCWs who acquired COVID-19, logistic regression models were used to evaluate the adjusted odds of asymptomatic disease using high-risk exposure outside the healthcare system as the explanatory variable. The number of symptoms between exposure groups was evaluated with the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. The risk of seropositivity among all HCS by work exposure was evaluated during both periods.

Survey and serological testing.

Seroprevalence increased from 1.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2%–2.6%) to 13.7% (95% CI, 11.9%–15.5%) during the study. Only during period 2 did HCWs with the highest work exposure (versus low exposure) have an increased risk of seropositivity (risk difference [RD], 7%; 95% CI, 1%–13%). Participants who had a high-risk exposure outside of work (compared to those without) had a decreased probability of asymptomatic disease (odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16–0.86) and demonstrated more symptoms (median 3 [IQR, 2–6] vs 1 [IQR, 0–4]; P = .001).

Healthcare-acquired COVID-19 increases the probability of asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 disease compared to community-acquired disease. This finding suggests that infection prevention strategies (including masks and eye protection) may be mitigating inoculum and supports the variolation theory in COVID-19.