If people with episodic mental-health conditions lose their job due to an episode of their mental illness, they often experience personal negative consequences. Therefore, reintegration after sick leave is critical to avoid unfavorable courses of disease, longer inability to work, long payment of sickness benefits, and unemployment. Existing return-to-work (RTW) programs have mainly focused on “common mental disorders” and often used very elaborate and costly interventions without yielding convincing effects. It was the aim of the RETURN study to evaluate an easy-to-implement RTW intervention specifically addressing persons with mental illnesses being so severe that they require inpatient treatment.

The RETURN study was a multi-center, cluster-randomized controlled trial in acute psychiatric wards addressing inpatients suffering from a psychiatric disorder. In intervention wards, case managers (RTW experts) were introduced who supported patients in their RTW process, while in control wards treatment, as usual, was continued.

A total of 268 patients were recruited for the trial. Patients in the intervention group had more often returned to their workplace at 6 and 12 months, which was also mirrored in more days at work. These group differences were statistically significant at 6 months. However, for the main outcome (days at work at 12 months), differences were no longer statistically significant (p = 0.14). Intervention patients returned to their workplace earlier than patients in the control group (p = 0.040).

The RETURN intervention has shown the potential of case-management interventions when addressing RTW. Further analyses, especially the qualitative ones, may help to better understand limitations and potential areas for improvement.

The present study aimed at answering three research questions: (a) Does shared decision making (SDM) yield similar effects for patients with involuntary admission or incidents of aggression compared to patients with voluntary admission or without incidents of aggression? (b) Does SDM reduce the number of patients with incidents of aggression and the use of coercive measures? (c) Does the use of coercion have a negative impact on patients’ perceived involvement in decision making?

We used data from the cluster-randomized SDM-PLUS trial in which patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in 12 acute psychiatric wards of 4 German psychiatric hospitals either received an SDM-intervention or treatment as usual. In addition, data on aggression and coercive measures were retrospectively obtained from patients’ records.

The analysis included n = 305 inpatients. Patient aggression as well as coercive measures mostly took place in the first days of the inpatient stay and were seldom during the study phase of the SDM-PLUS trial.

Patients who had been admitted involuntarily or showed incidents of aggression profited similarly from the intervention with regard to perceived involvement, adherence, and treatment satisfaction compared to patients admitted voluntarily or without incidents of aggression. The intervention showed no effect on patient aggression and coercive measures. Having previously experienced coercive measures did not predict patients’ rating of perceived involvement.

Further research should focus on SDM-interventions taking place in the very first days of inpatients treatment and potential beneficial long effects of participatory approaches that may not be measurable during the current inpatient stay.

The Antipsychotic Long-acTing injection in schizOphrenia (ALTO) study was a non-interventional study across several European countries examining prescription of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics to identify sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients receiving and physicians prescribing LAIs. ALTO was also the first large-scale study in Europe to report on the use of both first- or second-generation antipsychotic (FGA- or SGA-) LAIs.

Patients with schizophrenia receiving a FGA- or SGA-LAI were enrolled between June 2013 and July 2014 and categorized as incident or prevalent users. Assessments included measures of disease severity, functioning, insight, well-being, attitudes towards antipsychotics, and quality of life.

For the 572 patients, disease severity was generally mild-to-moderate and the majority were unemployed and/or socially withdrawn. 331/572 were prevalent LAI antipsychotic users; of whom 209 were prescribed FGA-LAI. Paliperidone was the most commonly prescribed SGA-LAI (56% of incident users, 21% of prevalent users). 337/572 (58.9%) were considered at risk of non-adherence. Prevalent LAI users had a tendency towards better insight levels (PANSS G12 item). Incident FGA-LAI users had more severe disease, poorer global functioning, lower quality of life, higher rates of non-adherence, and were more likely to have physician-reported lack of insight.

These results indicate a lower pattern of FGA-LAI usage, reserved by prescribers for seemingly more difficult-to-treat patients and those least likely to adhere to oral medication.