Alcohol use in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is under-researched. Previous reviews have explored substance use as a whole, but this neglects individual characteristics unique to different substances. Alcohol use in non-clinical samples is associated with diverse responses. To advance practice and policy, an improved understanding of alcohol use among people with ASD is crucial to meet individual needs.

This was a narrative systematic review of the current literature on the association between alcohol use and ASD, focusing on aetiology (biological, psychological, social and environmental risk factors) and implications (consequences and protective factors) of alcohol use in autistic populations who utilise clinical services. We sought to identify priority research questions and offer policy and practice recommendations.

PROSPERO Registration: CRD42023430291. The search was conducted across five databases: CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychINFO and Global Health. Included studies explored alcohol use and ASD within clinical samples.

A total of 22 studies was included in the final review. The pooled prevalence of alcohol use disorder in ASD was 1.6% and 16.1% in large population registers and clinical settings, respectively. Four components were identified as possible aetiological risk factors: age, co-occurring conditions, gender and genetics. We identified ten implications for co-occurring alcohol use disorder in ASD, summarised as a concept map.

Emerging trends in the literature suggest direction and principles for research and practice. Future studies should use a standardised methodological approach, including psychometrically validated instruments and representative samples, to inform policy and improve the experience for autistic populations with co-occurring alcohol use.

Identifying youths most at risk to COVID-19-related mental illness is essential for the development of effective targeted interventions.

To compare trajectories of mental health throughout the pandemic in youth with and without prior mental illness and identify those most at risk of COVID-19-related mental illness.

Data were collected from individuals aged 18–26 years (N = 669) from two existing cohorts: IMAGEN, a population-based cohort; and ESTRA/STRATIFY, clinical cohorts of individuals with pre-existing diagnoses of mental disorders. Repeated COVID-19 surveys and standardised mental health assessments were used to compare trajectories of mental health symptoms from before the pandemic through to the second lockdown.

Mental health trajectories differed significantly between cohorts. In the population cohort, depression and eating disorder symptoms increased by 33.9% (95% CI 31.78–36.57) and 15.6% (95% CI 15.39–15.68) during the pandemic, respectively. By contrast, these remained high over time in the clinical cohort. Conversely, trajectories of alcohol misuse were similar in both cohorts, decreasing continuously (a 15.2% decrease) during the pandemic. Pre-pandemic symptom severity predicted the observed mental health trajectories in the population cohort. Surprisingly, being relatively healthy predicted increases in depression and eating disorder symptoms and in body mass index. By contrast, those initially at higher risk for depression or eating disorders reported a lasting decrease.

Healthier young people may be at greater risk of developing depressive or eating disorder symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Targeted mental health interventions considering prior diagnostic risk may be warranted to help young people cope with the challenges of psychosocial stress and reduce the associated healthcare burden.

Medically assisted alcohol withdrawal (MAAW) is increasingly undertaken on acute adult psychiatric wards.

Comparison of the quality of MAAW between acute adult wards and specialist addictions units in mental health services.

Clinical audit conducted by the Prescribing Observatory for Mental Health (POMH). Information on MAAW was collected from clinical records using a bespoke data collection tool.

Forty-five National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts/healthcare organisations submitted data relating to the treatment of 908 patients undergoing MAAW on an acute adult ward or psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU) and 347 admitted to a specialist NHS addictions unit. MAAW had been overseen by an addiction specialist in 33 (4%) of the patients on an acute adult ward/PICU. A comprehensive alcohol history, measurement of breath alcohol, full screening for Wernicke's encephalopathy, use of parenteral thiamine, prescription of medications for relapse prevention (such as acamprosate) and referral for specialist continuing care of alcohol-related problems following discharge were all more commonly documented when care was provided on a specialist unit or when there was specialist addictions management on an acute ward.

The findings suggest that the quality of care provided for medically assisted withdrawal from alcohol, including the use of evidence-based interventions, is better when clinicians with specialist addictions training are involved. This has implications for future quality improvement in the provision of MAAW in acute adult mental health settings.

To explore the theory of wellbeing and to propose an operational definition for wellbeing in doctors.

Hypothesis: An operational definition for wellbeing in doctors is needed in order for it to be measured and interventions to improve it developed.

There is no internationally recognised definition for wellbeing and yet wellbeing is an increasingly fashionable topic of research and development, including in doctors. This is because wellbeing can be described using either hedonist, or eudonist philosophy and there is a lack of conceptual clarity about what wellbeing is, and how it works. Research into the measurement of mental wellbeing has been dominated by individualist societies, with the inherent bias towards measuring self-centred components and not the other-orientated components that might be valued more in collectivist societies and by doctors.

The Centre for Workforce Wellbeing (C4WW), a collaboration between the University of Southampton and Health Education England, was created to support research into the nature, assessment and enhancement of wellbeing in physicians. A literature review of the philosophy, definition and measurement of wellbeing was undertaken with a focus on mental wellbeing at work and specifically in doctors.

A concept map of the relationship between wellbeing terms has been created and was used to understand and classify where mental wellbeing itself was being defined and measured in studies, as opposed to a component of wellbeing, or determinant of wellbeing. Thematic analysis was used to develop an operational definition of wellbeing for doctors.

Measurement of wellbeing and interventions for wellbeing cannot be developed if you cannot clearly define what wellbeing is. An operational definition of mental wellbeing in doctors is ethically required to prevent research waste and to allow us to identify and recreate when doctors thrive, not just survive.

Health Education England funded PhD.

To achieve a consensus Core Outcome Set for measuring mental wellbeing in doctors.

Hypothesis: A minimum set of valid, reliable and practical wellbeing measures is needed for doctors.

The importance of doctors’ mental wellbeing to everyone using Health Care is highlighted by the levels of burnout reported in doctors around the world. In 2019 a number of UK policy documents made recommendations for the wellbeing of doctors, but how those wellbeing interventions are evaluated needs to be defined. Core Outcome Sets are increasingly being used in medicine to prevent waste in research, by recommending the inclusion of a minimum set of valid, reliable and practical measures. An operational definition and Core Outcome Set for wellbeing in doctors is needed to meaningfully progress the work in this field.

The Centre for Workforce Wellbeing (C4WW), a collaboration between the University of Southampton and Health Education England, was created to support research into the nature, assessment and enhancement of wellbeing in physicians. A Systematic Review of wellbeing measures used in doctors and the robustness of those measures, along with surveys of 250 UK doctors of all grades and specialities and patient and public involvement is informing what a core outcome set could be. A Delphi Study among 37 UK experts has been initiated to establish the consensus Core Outcome Set.

Publication of research into doctors’ wellbeing is growing internationally. In the UK alone data are being captured by multiple national organisations including: the Care Quality Commission, General Medical Council, British Medical Association and the Royal Colleges. Health and Social Care Organisations are, therefore, keen to “do something” and are spending money on wellbeing interventions with little, or no, evidence base and a lack of appropriate, comparable evaluation. A Core Outcome Set for measuring wellbeing in doctors is ethically required to reduce waste, to replace burnout measures and to refine wellbeing interventions.

Wellbeing measures that actually measure wellbeing, and not burnout, which are validated, reliable and practical, are needed to inform local organisational, national government and international research policy. An absence of burnout does not equate to wellbeing. The focus of measurement needs to shift to capture in what contexts we thrive, not just survive. If everyone used the same Core Outcome Set to measure mental wellbeing, direct comparisons could be made, and money invested, in creating infrastructure, processes and cultures that really work.

Health Education England funded PhD.

Alcohol-related presentations to acute hospitals in the UK are increasing, but little is known of the clinical characteristics or natural history of this patient group.

To describe the clinical characteristics, drinking profile and trajectory of a cohort of patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD) attending hospital, and explore participant perspectives of the impact of hospital attendance on their relationship with alcohol.

We conducted a mixed method, prospective, observational cohort study of patients with AUD seen in an acute hospital. Participants were interviewed with a range of questionnaires at baseline and followed up on at 6 months. A subsample also completed in-depth qualitative interviews.

We recruited 141 patients; 132 (93.6%) were followed up at 6 months and 26 completed qualitative interviews. Of the 141 patients, 60 (42.6%) stated the index hospital episode included the first discussion of their alcohol use in a secondary care setting. Most rated discussion of their alcohol use in hospital as ‘very positive’ or ‘positive’ (102/141, 72.3%), but lack of coordinated care with community services undermined efforts to sustain change. At 6 months, 11 (7.8%) patients had died, but in those who survived and completed assessment (n = 121), significant and clinically meaningful improvements were seen across a range of outcomes, with 55 patients (45.5%) showing a favourable drinking outcome at 6 months.

Patients with AUD have high levels of morbidity and mortality, yet many made substantial changes following intervention in hospital for their alcohol use. Prospective trials need to identify the effect of alcohol care teams in optimising this ‘teachable moment’ for patients.

Although hospital emergency preparedness efforts have been recognized as important, there has been growing pressure on cost containment, as well as consolidation within the US health care system. There is little data looking at what health care emergency preparedness functions have been, could be, or should be centrally coordinated at a system level.

We developed a questionnaire for academic health systems and asked about program funding, resources provided, governance, and activities. The questionnaire also queried managers’ opinions regarding the appropriate role for the system-level resources in emergency response, as well as about what is most helpful at the system-level supporting preparedness.

Fifty-two of 97 systems (54%) responded. The most frequently occurring system-wide activities included: creating trainings or exercise templates (75%), promoting preparedness for employees in the system (75%), providing access to specific subject matter experts (73%), and developing specific plans for individual member entities within their system (73%). The top resources provided included a common mass notification system (71%), arranging for centralized contracts for goods and services (71%), and providing subject matter expertise (69%).

Currently, there is wide variation in the resources, capabilities, and programs used to support and coordinate system-level emergency preparedness among academic health systems. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:574–577)