Sean Grant

Prevalence of, risk factors for, and consequences of posttraumatic stress disorder and other mental health problems in military populations deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan

This review summarizes the epidemiology of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and related mental health problems among persons who served in the armed forces during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, as reflected in the literature published between 2009 and 2014. One-hundred and sixteen research studies are reviewed, most of which are among non-treatment-seeking US service members or treatment-seeking US veterans. Evidence is provided for demographic, military, and deployment-related risk factors for PTSD, though most derive from cross-sectional studies and few control for combat exposure, which is a primary risk factor for mental health problems in this cohort. Evidence is also provided linking PTSD with outcomes in the following domains: physical health, suicide, housing and homelessness, employment and economic well-being, social well-being, and aggression, violence, and criminality. Also included is evidence about the prevalence of mental health service use in this cohort. In many instances, the current suite of studies replicates findings observed in civilian samples, but new findings emerge of relevance to both military and civilian populations, such as the link between PTSD and suicide. Future research should make effort to control for combat exposure and use longitudinal study designs; promising areas for investigation are in non-treatment-seeking samples of US veterans and the role of social support in preventing or mitigating mental health problems in this group.

Development of System-level Performance Measures for Evaluation of Models of Care for Inflammatory Arthritis in Canada

Objective. To develop system-level performance measures for evaluating the care of patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA), including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Methods. This study involved several methodological phases. Over multiple rounds, various participants were asked to help define a set of candidate measurement themes. A systematic search was conducted of existing guidelines and measures. A set of 6 performance measures was defined and presented to 50 people, including patients with IA, rheumatologists, allied health professionals, and researchers using a 3-round, online, modified Delphi process. Participants rated the validity, feasibility, relevance, and likelihood of use of the measures. Measures with median ratings ≥ 7 for validity and relevance were included in the final set. Results. Six performance measures were developed evaluating the following aspects of care, with each measure being applied separately for each type of IA except where specified: waiting times for rheumatology consultation for patients with new onset IA, percentage of patients with IA seen by a rheumatologist, percentage of patients with IA seen in yearly followup by a rheumatologist, percentage of patients with RA treated with a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), time to DMARD therapy in RA, and number of rheumatologists per capita. Conclusion. The first set of system-level performance measures for IA care in Canada has been developed with broad input. The measures focus on timely access to care and initiation of appropriate treatment for patients with IA, and are likely to be of interest to other arthritis care systems internationally.

Development of key performance indicators to evaluate centralized intake for patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis

IntroductionCentralized intake is integral to healthcare systems to support timely access to appropriate health services. The aim of this study was to develop key performance indicators (KPIs) to evaluate centralized intake systems for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsPhase 1 involved stakeholder meetings including healthcare providers, managers, researchers and patients to obtain input on candidate KPIs, aligned along six quality dimensions: appropriateness, accessibility, acceptability, efficiency, effectiveness, and safety. Phase 2 involved literature reviews to ensure KPIs were based on best practices and harmonized with existing measures. Phase 3 involved a three-round, online modified Delphi panel to finalize the KPIs. The panel consisted of two rounds of rating and a round of online and in-person discussions. KPIs rated as valid and important (≥7 on a 9-point Likert scale) were included in the final set.ResultsTwenty-five KPIs identified and substantiated during Phases 1 and 2 were submitted to 27 panellists including healthcare providers, managers, researchers, and patients in Phase 3. After the in-person meeting, three KPIs were removed and six were suggested. The final set includes 9 OA KPIs, 10 RA KPIs and 9 relating to centralized intake processes for both conditions. All 28 KPIs were rated as valid and important.ConclusionsArthritis stakeholders have proposed 28 KPIs that should be used in quality improvement efforts when evaluating centralized intake for OA and RA. The KPIs measure five of the six dimensions of quality and are relevant to patients, practitioners and health systems.

Reviewing and interpreting the effects of brief alcohol interventions: comment on a Cochrane review about motivational interviewing for young adults

Abstract Background Cochrane recently published a systematic review on motivational interviewing (MI) for alcohol misuse in young adults. The review authors concluded that ‘there are no substantive, meaningful benefits of MI interventions for the prevention of alcohol misuse’ (p. 2), as effect sizes were ‘small and unlikely to be of any meaningful benefit in practice’ (p. 27). As most of these interventions were quite brief, we wish to open a dialogue about interpreting effect sizes in this review and of (brief) alcohol interventions more generally. Analysis We analyze four methodological aspects of the review that likely influenced the authors conclusions about intervention effects: (1) risk of bias assessments, (2) search strategies, (3) assessing the quality of the body of evidence and (4) definitions of sustainability and clinical significance. Conclusions We interpret the effect sizes found in this review to indicate modest yet beneficial and potentially meaningful effects of these interventions, given their brevity and low cost. This interpretation is consistent with other reviews on brief, MI‐based interventions and brief interventions more generally. We therefore encourage the field to re‐open dialogue about the clinical importance of the effects of MI on alcohol misuse by young adults. Rather than dismissing interventions with small effects, we believe a more fruitful way forward for the field would be to catalogue effect sizes for various alcohol interventions. Such a catalogue would help stakeholders themselves to choose which interventions meet their minimum desired impact, and thus may be suitable given their targeted populations, setting and resources.

A systematic review and critical appraisal of qualitative metasynthetic practice in public health to develop a taxonomy of operations of reciprocal translation

INTRODUCTION Reciprocal translation, the understanding of one studys findings in terms of anothers, is the foundation of most qualitative metasynthetic methods. In light of the proliferation of metasynthesis methods, the current review sought to create a taxonomy of operations of reciprocal translation using recently published qualitative metasyntheses. METHODS On 19 August 2013, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO were searched. Included articles were full reports of metasyntheses of qualitative studies published in 2012 in English-language peer-reviewed journals. Two reviewers, working independently, screened records, assessed full texts for inclusion and extracted data on methods from each included metasynthesis. Systematic review methods used were summarised, and metasynthetic methods were inductively analysed to develop the taxonomy. RESULTS Of 61 included metasyntheses, 21 (34%) reported fully replicable search strategies and 51 (84%) critically appraised included studies. Based on methods in these metasyntheses, we developed a taxonomy of reciprocal translation with four overlapping categories: visual representation; key paper integration; data reduction and thematic extraction; and line-by-line coding. DISCUSSION This systematic review presents an update on methods and reporting currently used in qualitative metasynthesis. It also goes beyond the proliferation of approaches to offer a parsimonious approach to understanding how reciprocal translations are accomplished across metasynthetis methods.

Mindfulness-based Relapse Prevention for Substance Use Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objectives: Substance use disorder (SUD) is a prevalent health issue with serious personal and societal consequences. This review aims to estimate the effects and safety of Mindfulness-based Relapse Prevention (MBRP) for SUDs. Methods: We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating MBRP for adult patients diagnosed with SUDs. Two reviewers independently assessed citations, extracted trial data, and assessed risks of bias. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and assessed quality of the body of evidence (QoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Results: We identified 9 randomized controlled trials comprising 901 participants. We did not detect statistically significant differences between MBRP and comparators on relapse (odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46–1.13, low QoE), frequency of use (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.02, 95% CI −0.40 to 0.44, low QoE), treatment dropout (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.62, very low QoE), depressive symptoms (SMD −0.09, 95% CI −0.39 to 0.21, low QoE), anxiety symptoms (SMD −0.32, 95% CI −1.16 to 0.52, very low QoE), and mindfulness (SMD −0.28, 95% CI −0.72 to 0.16, very low QoE). We identified significant differences in favor of MBRP on withdrawal/craving symptoms (SMD −0.13, 95% CI −0.19 to −0.08, I2 = 0%, low QoE) and negative consequences of substance use (SMD −0.23, 95% CI −0.39 to −0.07, I2 = 0%, low QoE). We found negligible evidence of adverse events. Conclusions: We have limited confidence in estimates suggesting MBRP yields small effects on withdrawal/craving and negative consequences versus comparator interventions. We did not detect differences for any other outcome. Future trials should aim to minimize participant attrition to improve confidence in effect estimates.

Acupuncture for substance use disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND This systematic review aims to estimate the effects of acupuncture for adults with substance use disorders (SUDs). METHODS We searched 7 electronic databases and bibliographies of previous studies to identify eligible randomized trials. Two independent reviewers screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We performed random effects meta-analyses. We assessed quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS We included 41 studies with 5,227 participants. No significant differences were observed between acupuncture and comparators (passive controls, sham acupuncture, treatment as usual, and active interventions) at post-intervention for relapse (SMD -0.12; 95%CI -0.46 to 0.22; 10 RCTs), frequency of substance use (SMD -0.27; -2.67 to 2.13; 2 RCTs), quantity of substance use (SMD 0.01; -0.40 to 0.43; 3 RCTs), and treatment dropout (OR 0.82; 0.63 to 1.09; 22 RCTs). We identified a significant difference in favor of acupuncture versus comparators for withdrawal/craving at post-intervention (SMD -0.57, -0.93 to -0.20; 20 RCTs), but we identified evidence of publication bias. We also identified a significant difference in favor of acupuncture versus comparators for anxiety at post-intervention (SMD -0.74, -1.15 to -0.33; 6 RCTs). Results for withdrawal/craving and anxiety symptoms were not significant at longer follow-up. Safety data (12 RCTs) suggests little risk of serious adverse events, though participants may experience slight bleeding or pain at needle insertion sites. CONCLUSIONS Available evidence suggests no consistent differences between acupuncture and comparators for substance use. Results in favor of acupuncture for withdrawal/craving and anxiety symptoms are limited by low quality bodies of evidence.

CONSORT-SPI 2018 Explanation and Elaboration: guidance for reporting social and psychological intervention trials

BackgroundThe CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement was developed to help biomedical researchers report randomised controlled trials (RCTs) transparently. We have developed an extension to the CONSORT 2010 Statement for social and psychological interventions (CONSORT-SPI 2018) to help behavioural and social scientists report these studies transparently.MethodsFollowing a systematic review of existing reporting guidelines, we conducted an online Delphi process to prioritise the list of potential items for the CONSORT-SPI 2018 checklist identified from the systematic review. Of 384 international participants, 321 (84%) participated in both rating rounds. We then held a consensus meeting of 31 scientists, journal editors, and research funders (March 2014) to finalise the content of the CONSORT-SPI 2018 checklist and flow diagram.ResultsCONSORT-SPI 2018 extends 9 items (14 including sub-items) from the CONSORT 2010 checklist, adds a new item (with 3 sub-items) related to stakeholder involvement in trials, and modifies the CONSORT 2010 flow diagram. This Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document is a user manual to enhance understanding of CONSORT-SPI 2018. It discusses the meaning and rationale for each checklist item and provides examples of complete and transparent reporting.ConclusionsThe CONSORT-SPI 2018 Extension, this E&E document, and the CONSORT website (www.consort-statement.org) are helpful resources for improving the reporting of social and psychological intervention RCTs.

Scientific Reporting: Raising the Standards.

This article is based on a presentation that was made at the 2014 annual meeting of the editorial board of Health Education & Behavior. The article addresses critical issues related to standards of scientific reporting in journals, including concerns about external and internal validity and reporting bias. It reviews current reporting guidelines, effects of adopting guidelines, and offers suggestions for improving reporting. The evidence about the effects of guideline adoption and implementation is briefly reviewed. Recommendations for adoption and implementation of appropriate guidelines, including considerations for journals, are provided.

Reporting randomised trials of social and psychological interventions: the CONSORT-SPI 2018 Extension

BackgroundRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) are used to evaluate social and psychological interventions and inform policy decisions about them. Accurate, complete, and transparent reports of social and psychological intervention RCTs are essential for understanding their design, conduct, results, and the implications of the findings. However, the reporting of RCTs of social and psychological interventions remains suboptimal. The CONSORT Statement has improved the reporting of RCTs in biomedicine. A similar high-quality guideline is needed for the behavioural and social sciences. Our objective was to develop an official extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 Statement (CONSORT 2010) for reporting RCTs of social and psychological interventions: CONSORT-SPI 2018.MethodsWe followed best practices in developing the reporting guideline extension. First, we conducted a systematic review of existing reporting guidelines. We then conducted an online Delphi process including 384 international participants. In March 2014, we held a 3-day consensus meeting of 31 experts to determine the content of a checklist specifically targeting social and psychological intervention RCTs. Experts discussed previous research and methodological issues of particular relevance to social and psychological intervention RCTs. They then voted on proposed modifications or extensions of items from CONSORT 2010.ResultsThe CONSORT-SPI 2018 checklist extends 9 of the 25 items from CONSORT 2010: background and objectives, trial design, participants, interventions, statistical methods, participant flow, baseline data, outcomes and estimation, and funding. In addition, participants added a new item related to stakeholder involvement, and they modified aspects of the flow diagram related to participant recruitment and retention.ConclusionsAuthors should use CONSORT-SPI 2018 to improve reporting of their social and psychological intervention RCTs. Journals should revise editorial policies and procedures to require use of reporting guidelines by authors and peer reviewers to produce manuscripts that allow readers to appraise study quality, evaluate the applicability of findings to their contexts, and replicate effective interventions.