HearUs Open Forum meeting – Tuesday 6th May 2014

Matthew Mckenzie attended the HearUs Open Forum meeting on Tuesday 6th May 2014.

This month’s guest presenters were Peter from Mind in Croydon, Sarah Mines from the Untapped Theatre Company, Dr Constantina Papoulias from the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, KCL , Georgina Boon, Dr Joseph Rodrigues and Dietitian specialist Deborah Thompson.

Matthew has done a great video blog about this event.  It includes a lot of information about medication and diet – and much more….

 

You can also view photos of the event here: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.722541431121959.1073741888.476820022360769&type=3


Antidepressant citalopram heart safety warning

“Safety warning over Britain’s most common antidepressant,” The Daily Telegraph reports. “Doctors have been told to lower the maximum dose” for all patients, the Telegraph continues.

The news is based on drug safety advice issued in October last year by the UK’s drug regulator about the antidepressant drugs citalopram (Cipramil) and escitalopram (Cipralex). The revised advice for doctors followed findings from a study that found both drugs were associated with abnormalities known to increase risks to the heart. Importantly, it found that the risk increased at higher doses. This news was ignored at the time but has surfaced today with the Telegraph reporting criticism of the drug regulator for “failing to make a public announcement”.

People who have been prescribed citalopram and escitalopram should not be alarmed into stopping taking their medication. If you are concerned about the dosage of your depression medication you should discuss it with your GP.

What is citalopram and what is it used for?

Citalopram is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), a type of antidepressant drug commonly used to treat people with major depressive disorder, anxiety and obsessive compulsive disorder. It is more commonly known by its brand name in the UK, Cipramil, and is manufactured by the pharmaceutical company Lundbeck.

A variation of citalopram (escitalopram – brand name Cipralex), also made by Lundbeck, was included in the drug safety update. It is used to treat major depressive episodes, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, anxiety disorders and obsessive compulsive disorder.

What is the safety advice?

The safety advice for citalopram and escitalopram was issued to healthcare professionals by the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). Included in the safety warning were updated recommendations about new maximum daily dose restrictions, as well as warnings and contraindications (which indicate when it is not advisable to prescribe the drug).

The advice followed a study carried out by the l. The randomised controlled trial (RCT)found that citalopram and escitalopram were associated with increased electrical abnormalities of the heart (known as QT interval prolongation) and that these abnormalities increased with increasing doses (known as dose-dependency).

In the RCT, electrocardiogram measurements showed that when a 60mg dose of citalopram was given, it took twice as long for the heart to recover as when a 20mg dose was given. For a 60mg dose it took the heart 16.7 milliseconds to recover (90%confidence interval 15.0 to 18.4) and for a 20mg dose it took the heart 7.5 milliseconds to recover (90% confidence interval 5.9 to 9.1).

Importantly, the risks of both drugs on QT interval prolongation have been known for some time and have been included in the product information of both drugs. These study findings further defined this risk and have clarified that the drug’s effects on QT interval are dose-dependent. The safety update clarifies this dose-dependent effect to ensure that doctors, who should already be aware of the risk, can prescribe safely and appropriately.

The new recommended daily doses for citalopram are:

  • 40mg daily for adults (previously 60mg)
  • 20mg daily for patients older than 65 years (previously 40mg)
  • 20mg daily for those with poor liver function (previously 30mg)

For escitalopram, the maximum daily dose for patients older than 65 years is now 10mg. Other recommended doses remain unchanged. Further studies have not shown an added benefit at doses higher than 40mg.

The MHRA also recommends that citalopram and escitalopram should not be used in patients with known QT interval prolongation or in combination with other medicines known to prolong the QT interval. For example, prolonged QT interval is also a symptom of “long QT syndrome”, which is a type of heart arrhythmia. This was one of the several possible causes of thecollapse and heart attack in March of the Premier League footballer Fabrice Muamba.

The MHRA advises doctors to exercise caution when prescribing citalopram to patients who have a high risk of developing a condition known as Torsade de Pointes (a kind of heart rhythm problem). Those at risk include people who are known to have:

  • congestive heart failure
  • previous myocardial infarction (heart attack)
  • bradyarrhythmias (slow heartbeat)
  • predisposition to hypokalaemia (low potassium levels in the blood) or hypomagnesaemia (low magnesium levels in the blood) because of other illness or medicines

When was the new advice issued?

The safety update was issued by letter to healthcare professionals by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) on October 24 2011. The product information of each drug was also updated.

Why is it a problem now?

According to the Telegraph, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) came under fire “last night” (June 29 2012) when “experts criticised the MHRA for failing to make a public announcement – as it has done over other alerts such as the PIP breast implant scandal”. This is because, at the time of the safety update, only health professionals were notified, the Telegraph claims. It is not clear which experts the Telegraph is referring to. The newspaper’s story includes a quote from a consultant cardiologist saying that GPs should not stop prescribing the drugs. However, the Telegraph’s story includes a quote from a spokesman from a patient safety charity – Action against Medical Accidents – critical of the apparent failure by regulators to alert the public. The spokesman said that, “it is particularly disappointing that there has been so little transparency with patients and the public about this”.

Beyond these new quotations, it is difficult to see why the Telegraph has reported this as news today. The updates were available on the MHRA website in December 2011.

People receiving citalopram and escitalopram should not be alarmed and should not stop taking their medication. Anyone concerned about the dosage of their depression medication should discuss it with their GP.

Via http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/07July/Pages/antidepressant-citalopram-qt-heart-rhythm-safety-warning.aspx


At Last, A Report That Skewers Iain Duncan Smith’s Welfare Policies

This article titled “At last, a report that skewers Iain Duncan Smith’s welfare policies” was written by Alex Andreou, for theguardian.com on Monday 9th December 2013 18.02 UTC

Today Iain Duncan Smith is being questioned by the Commons work and pensions committee on universal credit, after finally admitting last week that the scheme’s targets had been “reset”. Last week, the petition calling for a cumulative impact assessment of the way welfare reform affects sick and disabled people, known as the WOW petition, passed 100,000 signatures, triggering its consideration for debate by the backbench business committee. To add to Duncan Smith’s woes, the well-respected Centre for Welfare Reform has released details of its report, How Norms Become Targets, which exposes the myth that Atos, the private company responsible for assessing the needs of people unable to work, does not do so on the basis of targets.

Today also sees the publication of the stunning People’s Review of the Work Capability Assessment (pdf). It has been compiled by the anonymous organisation, We Are Spartacus, whose activism in this area has been hugely empowering. The report is a collection of statistics surrounding welfare reform and reactions of MPs, charities and professional groups to the way in which it has been administered. An almanac of condemnation, if you will. Most importantly, the report compiles statements from sick and disabled people actually going through the system.

These are most encouraging developments and point to a sea-change in the way our democracy works in this internet age. There is no doubt that without extensive use of the internet and social media, the compilation of such a detailed report would have been impossible and its publication unnoticed. For too long, this group of most vulnerable people, many of them with serious health and mobility problems, have been too easy a target for cost-cutting governments of all hues to demonise, recalibrate and victimise. This is no longer the case. Vulnerable people have grabbed the issue by the scruff of the neck and are taking the fight to the government. It is inspirational and points the way to a level of democratisation hitherto unseen.

I encourage you to read the report. It is packed with striking statistics and heartrending stories, in the words of people being put through this inhuman and degrading assessment. It contains the stories of those who can no longer speak, having taken their own lives or succumbed to their illness, while being hounded by the very department which is meant to protect them, people like Peter whose leg fused as a result of injury and, having suffered a stroke which meant he couldn’t grip with one hand, received a text telling him to attend the Jobcentre. He sent his partner a text which read “I give up”. He was found hanging at his home.

It contains incredibly powerful quotes which show that dissatisfaction with Atos is spread across MPs of all parties. Dr Sarah Wollaston, the Conservative MP, said of the assessment procedure: “Not surprisingly, it adds to their [claimants] sense of worthlessness – already stoked by a longstanding political narrative from both sides of the political divide that they are ‘shirkers, not workers’ or a drain on Britain’s ‘hardworking people’. They are neither.”

It contains tragic and often simultaneously humorous stories of ridiculous assessment reports, like the one on a 59-year-old woman who had had a hysterectomy following cervical cancer, which observed: “There is no evidence that the client is currently pregnant.” Or the one which concluded that someone who took an overdose of medication the previous night had “no current thoughts of self harm”.

This programme of welfare reform was always doomed to fail for a very simple reason. The purpose of welfare is to provide a safety net for the most vulnerable; its reform must have their interests at heart, rather than cost-cutting targets. Proper reform costs money. Duncan Smith himself recognised this simple fact before he came into power. In 2009, explaining his proposed reforms, he recognised that they would lead to a rise in the welfare bill in the short-term.

Iain Duncan Smith’s fall from grace, because of a botched IT system which has already caused £140m to be written off, is properly a cause of both frustration and comedy – like Al Capone being arrested for tax evasion. But I must ask, we all must ask: how many of the vulnerable people mentioned in the Spartacus report would still be alive today if that money has been properly spent?

Via welfarenewsservice.com


South London and Maudsley on film: humanity and humour

Looking at a newspaper story about the murder of drummer Lee Rigby earlier in the year, Lloyd, who has a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia, said that hearing about schizophrenics in the news made him feel worse. He worried that he didn’t know his own mind and wondered if he himself could turn into a murderer too, since that’s what he read in the papers. Dealing with the symptoms of psychosis can be difficult enough in itself. Having to deal with society’s perceptions that people with your diagnosis are violent and unpredictable adds another level of difficulty.

Earlier today, I attended an advance screening of Channel 4′s new series on the realities of modern mental health care at the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) mental health trust.  In the screening room in the basement of Channel 4′s headquarters in Horseferry Road, a select audience sat in red plush seats watching one of four programmes in the series on modern mental health care. The series is entitled Bedlam and the name choice has caused controversy. To an extent it can be argued that, when a respected NHS trust calls a television series after a medieval asylum, it dilutes the strength of the case against Thorpe Park’s “mental patient scary fun” horror maze Asylum. But what of the series itself?

The episode previewed profiled the work of Speedwell community mental health team (CMHT) in Deptford, south London, over the course of a year. The four-part series, which starts at 9pm this Thursday, also covers the Anxiety Disorders Residential Unit, Lambeth Triage (the front line for emergency cases) and the older adults unit (over 65s).

Without giving too much away, we followed patients Tamara, Lloyd and Rosemary, all of whom experience psychosis. We saw them trying to cope with periods of illness, voices, delusional beliefs about bed bugs and with children being taken into foster care.  We saw them using prescription drugs as well as speed and alcohol to help manage their troubling symptoms. We saw them at times chaotic and disturbed, and at other times funny and happy.

We saw social worker Jim Thurkle doing his best to hunt down and help patients, a third of whom refuse to engage with him. We saw Dr Tom Werner doing his best to confirm the stereotype of the psychiatrist in the bow tie. We saw the fine line between enabling someone to live the life they choose and intervening in the interests of their own health and safety.

Not once did we see someone who could be considered a danger to anyone else. Not once did any of the patients present as anywhere remotely near the stereotype of the paranoid schizophrenic mad axe murderer. What we saw was patients struggling to manage their lives in difficult circumstances, and the professionals who tried to help them.

It was particularly interesting to see the work of a CMHT  which, along with GPs, carry out the bulk of psychiatric care in this country. As the booklet handed out at the advance screening says:

“The lion’s share of SLaM’s work takes place in a community setting, looking after more than 35,000 people with mental health issues. SLaM treats 8,000 psychosis patients a year; 6,000 of whom are based and treated in the community. We touch on different treatments available and see intense and moving interaction with social workers and mental health teams.”

As Pete Beard, the producer of the episode, who answered questions after the screening, said:

“We wanted to reflect the realities of this challenging work, following the actual narratives of people walking a tightrope with their mental health as it happened and the teams who act as a safety net. I feel that these realities are rarely reflected accurately in the media and as a result it is important to demystify the work performed as community teams, especially taboo subjects such as being sectioned”.

It was profoundly moving to see someone taken away from their own home, against their will, and detained with no legal authority other than the personal opinions of a social worker and doctors. No police arrest, no court process, no judge, no jury. Just a simple form signed, and you have no choice about even the simplest things like what you eat, where you sleep or what shampoo you use to wash your hair. And, on a more intrusive level, you have no right to refuse medication.

This extended scene cannot help but make you reflect on the balance of power between the state and the individual, and on what society deems to be acceptable norms of behaviour. This is especially so when you’re dealing with someone you don’t really know, as can be the case when a mental health team is called out to consider sectioning someone. Britain has a proud tradition of eccentricity, but that is not tolerated if you are deemed to be mentally ill. Simply being a nuisance to others but in no way dangerous to yourself or others can, ultimately, mean three people decide on your behalf that your quality of life will be improved by a compulsory stay in a locked psychiatric ward.

The sectioning sequence made me think about the boundaries or free will and autonomy and to what extent people’s peculiarities are tolerated. I have been on the receiving end of such a process, and it changed my life irrevocably. As Dr Baggaley said, when he’s taken part in sectionings he does wonder whether this was what he trained for. Although he sees it as difficult, he does see it as necessary.

Dr Baggaley described the person in question as a “revolving door patient” who would face repeated hospitalisations, some under section (compulsion), for the rest of their life. And yet this is someone who will – under the current welfare benefits system – also face repeated Work Capability Assessments. It is hard to see the point of such assessments in this case particularly since, as Dr Sarah Wollaston MP wrote today, WCA’s are not geared towards helping people with mental health problems find and retain employment.

One of the things which struck me in this episode was the amount of humour. Despite their difficult circumstances and troubling symptoms, the patients followed could come across as affable, amenable and warm-hearted. Ripples of laughter would regularly rumble across the audience, and not just because viewers were looking for a little light relief in what was, after all, a serious topic. As with any other fly-on-the-wall documentary, the colourful charaters in this episode were full of humour. The seriousness of the subject matter made the flashes of levity even more welcome.

Overall, this preview episode was intimate, insightful and profound. It showed human beings in all our difficulties, complexities and ambiguities. It showed the realities of trying to combat the stigma around mental illness with humanity and humour. It showed that danger and fear are the least of the concerns of the CMHT.

On a final note, I will end with a criticism that was raised by audience members with personal experience of mental health services: namely that the episode was somewhat naive and unrealistic. Audience members had received far worse experiences of mental health care, or had been able to deliver a far worse service due to cutbacks. It was acknowledged by the film makers that Speedwell CMHT had a ring-fenced budget, so had not been under the same constraints and workload other CMHT’s they’d liaised with had.

It was also highlighted that a lot of the difficulties patients needed help with were practical, and that these needs were not being met. The patients were unable to deal with these matters themselves and therefore they were stuck in difficult circumstances. Examples were the bedbugs which did actually exist in Tamara’s flat. It was not a delusional belief (though its extent may have been) and dealing with that practical problem may have lessened her delusional symptoms. This and her use of amphetamines may also have been the way she managed the immense sorrow of losing her children. Lloyd appeared to be using alcohol to numb his pain.

With a series planned over two years and filmed over twelve months, much footage will have ended up on the cutting room floor. It’s a shame, however, that the close relationship between medical help and social support, and the parts played by talking therapies and thereapeutic activities, were overlooked completely in this preview episode.

Nor was the 9% reduction in inpatient beds in the past 2 years mentioned.  Nor were the terrible cuts to community mental health services mentioned.

On the other hand, as Madeliene Long, SLaM chair said:

“Despite it affecting so many people, mental illness is still poorly understood. The stigma and discrimination that people face can make their mental health even worse and can prevent them from seeking help. So it’s really important that we do everything we can to raise awareness, challenge stereotypes and promote the facts about mental health. I’m really pleased that we have been able to work with Channel 4 and The Garden Productions on such an ambitious project which sets out to do exactly that.”

As executive producer Amy Flanagan said,

“Many of these patients had lived long lives with no history of mental illness. It could happen to our parents, to us.”

And, if it does happen to us or someone we know, programmes such as these will mean it feels a little less alien and a little more a part of everyday life.

Via http://sectioneduk.wordpress.com via Bridget


Community mental health survey 2013

Read the results of our latest survey which looked at the experiences of people receiving community mental health services.

Eligibility and participation

  • Participants: over 13,000
  • Response rate: 29 per cent
  • Age range:18 years and older
  • Time period: July to September 2012
  • Eligibility: People who received care or treatment for a mental health condition, including services provided under the Care Programme Approach (CPA).
  • Exclusions: People who were only seen once for an assessment, current inpatients, and anyone primarily receiving treatment in specific areas such as drug and alcohol abuse, learning disability services and specialist forensic services.

Key Findings for England

People generally responded positively to questions asking about staff – including when answering questions about the health or social care worker that they had seen most recently and their care co-ordinator (or lead professional).

However, improvements can still be made in most other areas including information and involvement in decisions about:

  • medication.
  • care planning.
  • care reviews.
  • crisis care.
  • support with day to day living.

For more information read the national summary which describes the findings for England as a whole.

The results tables include comparisons with findings from the 2012 survey and identify statistically significant changes.

Results for NHS trusts

These results show how trusts performed on questions that could be scored in each area covered by the questionnaire.

The technique used to analyse these results allows us to identify which trusts we can confidently say performed ‘Better’, ‘Worse’ or ‘About the same’.

Find out how each trust scored in our A-Z list of community mental health services survey results by NHS trust.

For detailed information on how we scored the NHS trusts, please read the technical document below.

Benchmark reports

Each trust was also provided with a benchmark report on its scores in the survey. The reports benchmark the trust’s performance against all other trusts and identify areas for improvement.

The information in the benchmark reports provide more detail about the data contained on our NHS trust pages.

Download the individual benchmark reports for each trust from the NHS Surveys website.

Pre-release access list

You can find a list of individuals that had access to the results of the survey prior to publication below.


Major national survey prompts CQC to call for improvements in community mental health care

Too many people who use community mental health services are not being involved in decisions about their own care.

A major national  survey of more than 13,000 people who use community mental health services in England published today (17 September) by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) shows the care people receive in the community needs to improve. Of particular concern is people’s lack of involvement in their care plans and having their views taken into account when deciding which medication to take.

The 2013 survey of people who use community mental health services asks about the experiences of more than 13,000 people during the past 12 months. The survey involved 58 trusts in England who provide mental health services.

People were asked about the care and support they received from mental health services outside hospital, such as those offered by outpatient clinics, local teams providing crisis home treatment, assertive outreach, early intervention for psychosis, and generic community mental health services.

Care for people who have complex mental health needs and require multi-agency support is co-ordinated within a framework called the Care Programme Approach (CPA). Policy guidance states that people who are on the CPA should also receive support with day-to-day matters such as employment, housing and financial advice. The survey includes people who received care under the CPA as well as those who do not.

The survey results show that that some respondents said that they do not have a care plan, and many of those that do have one, do not fully understand it, this suggests that people are not being adequately involved in the decisions that are made about their care. Responses suggest that some care plans do not explain what people should do if they have a crisis and too few people have had a care review meeting in the last twelve months to discuss their care:

  • Fourteen per cent of respondents on CPA said they do not have an NHS care plan. Of the remainder, fewer than half (46%) ‘definitely’ understand their NHS care plan (down from 48% in 2012).

When asked if their NHS care plan covered what they should do in a crisis 58% of respondentson CPA responded ‘yes definitely’ though this is down from 60% in 2012. Less than half of thosenot on CPA (49%) responded ‘yes definitely’. Some respondents say they have not had a care review in the last 12 months to discuss their care:

  • Almost half (47%) of respondents not on CPA said they had not had a care review in the last 12 months.
  • The proportion of people on CPA who said they have not had a care review meeting in the last 12 months has increased from 24% in 2012 to 26% this year.

Although the majority of respondents know who their care coordinator is and were generally positive about them, results had declined from 2012:

  • Seventy two per cent said they could ‘always’ contact their care coordinator (or lead professional) if they had a problem, down from 74% in 2012.
  • Sixty per cent said their care coordinator (or lead professional) organised the care and services they need ‘very well’ down from 61% in 2012.

The survey also shows that some people are not being adequately involved in decisions about their medication, with almost a third (32%) saying their views were only taken into account ‘to some extent’ when deciding which medication to take and less than half (43%) of those who had been prescribed any new medication were ‘definitely’ told about possible side effects.

However in line with last year’s survey, most people responded positively to questions about the health or social care worker they saw most recently, with the majority (70%) (although down from 72% in 2012) saying they ‘definitely’ had enough time to discuss their condition and treatment, 78% saying they were ‘definitely’  listened to carefully and 72% of people saying their views ‘definitely’ were taken into account.

In a new question, respondents were asked to rate their overall experiences on a scale of 0-10 Most people (67%) responded positively rating their overall experience as a ‘7’ or above.

David Behan, CQC chief executive, said:

“This survey provides valuable intelligence about the experiences of people who are being supported by community mental health services. The survey describes some very positive experiences and flags where services can and must improve.

“People should always be at the heart of decisions about their own care. Care planning helps to make sure that people feel in control of their lives and illness and it can be vital in aiding their recovery. It is unacceptable that fewer people have adequate care planning than last year. It is also unacceptable for care plans not to include adequate crisis care management or for people to be poorly informed about the drugs they take.

“One of CQC’s key objectives this year is to focus on the care being provided to people by mental health services. The results of this survey will help our inspection teams under the Chief Inspector of Hospitals Prof Sir Mike Richards home in on the poorest providers and be able to challenge this poor performance though inspection.

“Trusts should look at their own results carefully and consider whether, firstly, they are assessing people’s needs properly in the context of the CPA policy, and secondly, whether they are giving them the appropriate level of support.

Ends

For media enquiries, call the CQC press office on 020 7448 9401 during office hours or out of hours on 07917 232 143.

For general enquiries, call 03000 61 61 61.

The results are primarily intended for use by NHS trusts to help them improve their performance. The CQC has included data from this survey in its Quality and Risk Profiles to assess compliance with the essential standards set by the government, and has published data for all NHS trusts on the CQC website. NHS England will use the results to understand patients’ experiences of NHS services and to drive improvements.

A set of tables showing the year on year results for each question is available on the CQC website, together with a national summary highlighting the key findings and the results for each NHS trust: Community mental health services survey 2013

About the national NHS patient survey programme

The Community Mental Health survey is currently under review and is  expected to change ahead of the next survey.

The NHS patient survey programme was established by the Department of Health in 2002, and taken over by the Commission for Health Improvement later that year. It then passed to the Healthcare Commission, followed by CQC. The programme covers a range of topics including mental health services, adult inpatient and outpatient services, maternity care, and ambulance services.

The surveys are funded by NHS trusts, using a standard core questionnaire and methodology prescribed by the co-ordination centre, run by the Picker Institute Europe. Most trusts will use a contractor approved by CQC to undertake the survey on their behalf.

About the Care Quality Commission

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the independent regulator of health and social care in England.

We make sure health and social care services provide people with safe, effective, compassionate, high-quality care and we encourage care services to improve.

We monitor, inspect and regulate services to make sure they meet fundamental standards of quality and safety and we publish what we find to help people choose care. 

Via http://www.wired-gov.net via Matthew


Questions for carers to think about asking Health Professionals

This is an audio blog by Matthew who is a carer.

They are his thoughts and suggestions about questions that carers can ask health professionals about their cared for person.

It contains some really useful tips and advice.


New Cochrane review provides strategies for managing sexual dysfunction brought on by antidepressants

See more at: http://www.thementalelf.net/mental-health-conditions/depression/new-cochrane-review-provide-strategies-for-managing-sexual-dysfunction-brought-on-by-antidepressants/#sthash.11hFTH9i.dpuf

#RT via Bridget


Mood, Anxiety & Personality Services – SLaM mental health service user and carer advisory group – summary of discussions – July 2013

Hello all,

The departments that manage the services at South London & Maudsely NHS Foundation Trust have ‘advisory groups’ where service users and carers come together to advise on and discuss developments.   The Mood, Anxiety & Personality (MAP) department advisory group produces a brief summary of their discussions.  The purpose  is to let interested people know what is being discussed.  Please circulate as appropriate.

With best wishes,

Alice

Alice Glover

Patient & Public Involvement LeadMood Anxiety & Personality CAG and Psychological Medicine CAG
email:  alice.glover@slam.nhs.uk tel: 020 3228 0959
113 Denmark Hill |The Maudsley Hospital | Denmark Hill | London | SE5 8AZ

 

Service User and Carer Advisory Group : Supporting people who use Services for Mood, Anxiety & Personality

Disorders, through collaborative work with Service Managers

The Service User and Carer Advisory Group is part of the Mood, Anxiety & Personality (MAP) Clinical Academic Group – an organisational structure which manages services for mood, anxiety & personality disorder across the South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM). Most advisory Group members have experience of using mental health services or of being a family member/carer of someone who does. Other members include senior managers. We meet every month and our aim is to keep the views of service users at the heart of all service developments and improvements. To make sure that people know what we are discussing in our meetings we have developed this short briefing sheet:

Seven service users, one carer consultant were present, plus SLaM PPI Lead, Dep. Director, Psychiatrist (Affective Disorders), Clinical Governance Proj. Officer, and Head of Nursing

Proposed merger of Kings Health Partners (KHP) Organisations– update circulated

Personality Disorder Pathway Development Group– valuable work to date will form the basis of developing some broad suggestions to take to the strategic executive management meeting with input from Advisory Group members.

MAP CAG services presentation – a review of current services and new developments, including winning the retender for the Improving Access to Psychological Services in Lambeth and Croydon; restructuring borough-based psychological therapy teams; decommissioning two unviable inpatient units; and increasing beds in the Anxiety Disorder Unit. We heard about the proposed forthcoming work to redevelop the assessment & treatment services.  Stakeholder feedback will be part of the process to help improve access, assessment, treatment and patient experience (including out-of-hours support).  There will be a restructure of day services and the introduction of ‘re-ablement’ services, working towards social inclusion, personal budgets, specialist reviews of medication for people in primary care, co-production of care plans, and easy access to crisis and support services for people in primary care

Bi-polar pathwayKarine Macritchie, the new SLaM Consultant Psychiatrist for Affective Disorders will be working with Professor Allan Young to improve and develop the care pathway for people with bi-polar disorder. The aim is to develop research and improve clinical programmes at the same time.  Service User/Carer participation will be vital as the local networks develop and focus groups are held.  Alice will co-ordinate this ongoing involvement work.  Our thanks to Karine, who is welcome to come back to the group for an update

Discharge Audit – should be completed in the next few months. Reception Audit– complete and recommendations will go to Governance Executive Meeting in September.

Service Development Updates –consultation and focus groups have contributed to the development of the Integrated Psychological Therapies quality indicators, and a new information leaflet has been drafted.

Feedback was received from the Trustwide Involvement Group, the Family and Carers Listening Event, the Recovery College and the recent Peer Support Event.  It was all encouraging and further derails can be obtained by asking Alice (see below)

It was agreed that it could be a useful idea to hold a cross CAG advisory group meeting for all members of the adult mental health service user and carer advisory groups.

PDF version here: Briefing Sheet July 2013


Here are some myths about depression and bipolar…courtesy NAMI

myths and facts

#RT via Jackie via http://www.nami.org/


Would you like to take part in a group discussion about genetic testing and clozapine? Final Call

My name is Ben Spencer and I am a psychiatry registrar at the Institute of Psychiatry working on a research project that is looking into people’s views of genetic testing in clozapine.

Schizophrenia is a common illness that can affect how people tolerate stress, and their experience of the world.  Some people who have schizophrenia do not get better on standard medication, and treatment with clozapine is offered.  Clozapine can affect the immune system and so people who take it have to have regular blood tests, and sometimes get side effects.

At the moment, researchers are looking into whether it might be possible to use a genetic test to predict if people with schizophrenia would benefit from clozapine, or would get side effects.  This research may mean that people would have to have blood tests less often when they are treated with clozapine.

No one has looked into people’s views on this, and I am keen to find out what people think.  To do this I have written a questionnaire about it to give to people.  I need to find out though if it’s asking the questions that service users think are important.

I am looking for people who have experience of mental health services, and who would like to look at a questionnaire we have written to find out about people’s views and attend a focus group discussion on it.  Ideally if you have knowledge or experience of clozapine or psychosis.

If you wanted to take part I would send you an information sheet about the study, and a copy of the questionnaire for you to complete in your own time.  I would also send you a feedback form so you can write about your experiences of it.

Then I would invite you to come along to a focus group to discuss with other similar people you thoughts on the questionnaire itself (is it too long, short, too simple).  Also at this group we would discuss the research itself and the issues or questions you think we should be asking.

You would be given your travel costs (up to a maximum of £10) to attend the focus group, and a £10 Marks and Spencer’s gift voucher for your involvement.

Please note the focus group session will take place on Thursday  25/07/2013 in Brixton.

Please get in touch if you are interested in being involved in this project by emailing : clozapineandgenes@gmail.com  with your name, phone number, and address to post the study information to.

The deadline to respond by is Wednesday 10/07/2013.


SLaM’s mother and baby unit praised

The specialist Mother and Baby Unit at the Bethlem Royal Hospital has been recognised as providing an example of “best practice” in caring for women suffering with severe mental illness during pregnancy or post-birth.

An NSPCC report released last week suggests the wellbeing of more than one in 10 newborn babies in England could be improved if all new mothers with mental illness had equal access to good services.

The report states there is evidence to show that the work carried out at the Channi Kumar Mother and Baby Unit, part of the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, leads to significant improvements in mental state in approximately three quarters of women, in the sensitivity of mothers with schizophrenia and postpartum psychosis when interacting with their babies and major improvements in the interaction of the babies of mothers with schizophrenia, psychosis and depression.

The 13-bed unit was set up for women who develop or have a relapse of serious mental illness during pregnancy or following the birth of their baby. The unit offers a wide range of treatment, therapy and care which is not offered on the same scale in any other unit in the UK.

One unique factor is the work of a developmental psychologist who works closely with the mothers and infants.

Dr Susan Pawlby works clinically as a developmental psychologist at the unit and academically at the King’s College London’s Institute of Psychiatry.

She said: “I think our unit stands out because we have a developmental psychologist to work with nursery nurses and nurses on the ward and most other units do not have that.

“It means we can give mothers and infants more support in forming and maintaining this early and most fundamental relationship. We have developed video feedback interventions so that mothers can see how their babies respond to them. Together we watch video clips of play sessions, talk about the communication between the mother and her baby in order to help mothers develop their relationship with their baby.

“We systematically evaluate this intervention and see how effective it is. Our work is to encourage mothers to respond to their babies’ cues, so that mothers become more sensitive and babies more co-operative in their interaction with one another. I am delighted our work has been recognised by the NSPCC.”

Alongside this support, the Mother and Baby Unit also treats mothers with medication where needed. The unit also offers various forms of therapy (psychological, art psychotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapy and cognitive analytical therapy), life skills, health skills, leisure activities, baby massage and dance therapy.

Following the release of the report the NSPCC is calling on health ministers to lead a drive to address major gaps in access to mental health services for pregnant and new mums.

Mental health problems including depression, anxiety, postpartum psychosis, obsessive compulsive disorders,  eating disorders , schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorderand personality disorder can begin or escalate when a woman is pregnant or in her infant’s first year. They can have a damaging effect on family life, and in the worst cases, impact on babies’ health and welfare.

Evidence shows that the vast majority of these illnesses are preventable and treatable, and with the right support, the negative effects on families can be avoided.

Sally Hogg, author of the NSPCC report, said: “The Mother and Baby Unit at Royal Bethlem Hospital provides excellent support for mothers suffering from perinatal mental illnesses and their babies. They do fantastic work to help mums to care for and bond with their babies, which helps ensure these children have the best possible start in life.

“It is crucial that more units like this are made available across the country for all families who need them, as without access to specialist units such as this some mothers don’t get the right help and can be separated from their babies, which is traumatic for the whole family.”

For more information on the NSPCC report:

http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/resourcesforprofessionals/underones/spotlight-mental-health-landing_wda96578.html

Read Susan’s story here

#RT via Bridget via http://www.slam.nhs.uk


SLaM Empowering Family and Carers Event

Dear Colleagues

SUITE is continuing with their successful Empowering Family and Carers Events for this year. All events have a different theme with presentations based on this theme.

These events are an opportunity for family members and carers to find out about how SLaM operates, what they can expect for themselves and their loved ones and how they can access these services. There are ‘surgeries’ for carers to meet professionals, get information about benefits, support services, medication, care and treatment and raise any concerns or complaints they have regarding the people they care for.

The next event will be on Tuesday 30th July at Mind in Croydon from 3.15 p.m. to 6.30 p.m. and the theme will be Medication. Please see poster attached for more information.

Booking Form July 2013 (2)

SLAM153 – Empowering Family-Carers Poster A4 July 2013 (9)

Please help us to advertise this event by passing this on to Carers & Family members and also Service Users so they can pass it to their carers. Please note this event is for Carers and Family members only but we are always looking for staff to be involved in delivering the event.

For more information, to book a place or to find out how you can be involved in helping to deliver the event please contact

Angela.Mitchell@slam.nhs.uk     Tel: 020 3228 3722

Bridget.Jones@slam.nhs.uk

Kind Regards

Bridget Jones

Carer Consultant

Please note that I only work part-time.

South London & Maudsley Foundation NHS Trust

Bishopsgate Centre | The Royal Bethlem Hospital | Monks Orchard Road | Beckenham | Kent | BR3 3BX


SELF ADVOCACY SKILLS TRAINING

2nd July– How to Develop your Self Esteem 11-1pm

9th July– Open Event to CoolTan Participants: Understanding Gender Equalities by Ester Craddock by SlaM Trainer 11-1pm

10th July– Men’s Group 3-5pm

16th July– Understanding How Medicines Work by SlaM Trainer 11-1pm

23rd July– Understanding the Structure of the Social Care System 11-1pm

24th July– Essentials of the Mental Health Act by Robert Lepper, SlaM Trainer 2-4pm

30th July– Learning about Social Care Services on Offer 11-1pm

(Check website for possible additional Training dates / and changes!)

Please email Phil Ruthen phil@cooltanarts.org.uk or Michelle Savioz michellesavioz@cooltanarts.org.uk for more information.

“July’s programme is the first full month including specialist workshops delivered by trainers from South London and Maudsley NHS Trust (SLaM). This ground-breaking arrangement will provide new and sustained opportunities for Self-Advocacy participants over the next 2 years. Working with SLaM trainers it’s hoped Self-Advocacy will strengthen further across the region. Please come and find out more about this exciting new addition!”

Pdf here: Self-advocacy A5 template for July 2013 Schedule


Antidepressants ‘could be risk to unborn babies’

The risk posed by some popular antidepressants in early pregnancy is not worth taking for women with mild to moderate depression, an expert has warned.

Professor Stephen Pilling says evidence suggests SSRIs can double the risk of a child being born with a heart defect.

The drugs have been used by up to one in six women of child-bearing age.

A manufacturer contacted by the BBC denies any link to major foetal malformations.

Panorama has spoken to eight mothers who had babies born with serious heart defects after taking a commonly used SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) antidepressant while pregnant. Currently, prescription guidelines for doctors only warn specifically against taking the SSRI, paroxetine, in early pregnancy.

But Prof Pilling, expert adviser to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), says that advice is about to be updated.

“The available evidence suggests that there is a risk associated with the SSRIs. We make a quite a lot of effort really to discourage women from smoking or drinking even small amounts of alcohol in pregnancy, and yet we’re perhaps not yet saying the same about antidepressant medication, which is going to be carrying similar – if not greater – risks,” he said.

When Anna Wilson, from Ayrshire, had her 20-week scan, doctors realised her son had a serious heart problem and would need immediate heart surgery when he was born.

Now eight months old, David was hooked up to machines for the first five weeks of his life. He will need more open-heart surgery before he starts school and doctors say he may not live beyond 40.

“He’s got a lot of suffering ahead of him before anything else,” his mother said. “We know that’s a certainty and that’s pretty awful.”

Four years before she became pregnant, Mrs Wilson was prescribed the drug Citalopram by her GP because she was suffering from anxiety.

Her doctor told her it was fine to continue using the drug when trying for a baby. But after David was born she asked what might have caused his heart condition.

“We did meet with a cardiologist at one of the scan appointments, and he explained that as far as he knew there were no environmental factors and it wasn’t because of anything we as parents had done. It was just one of those things – couldn’t be prevented,” she said.

Prof Pilling says the guidance will now be re-written to take in to account evidence that the SSRI antidepressants, as a group, are linked to heart defects.

He says the risk of any baby being born with a heart defect is around two in 100; but the evidence suggests if the mother took an SSRI in early pregnancy that risk increases to around four in 100.

He says that women not suffering from the most severe depression who become pregnant whilst taking the drug are taking an unnecessary risk.

“You’ve got double the risk. And for women who are mild to moderately depressed, I don’t think that those risks, in most cases, are really worth taking” he said.

“It’s not just when a woman who’s pregnant is sitting in front of you. I think it needs to be thought about with a woman who could get pregnant. And, that’s the large majority of women aged between 15 and 45.”

Mrs Wilson will never know for sure what caused David’s heart defect, but said if she had known there was even a very small risk associated with the drug she would have stopped taking it.

“If David’s condition was preventable, and it wasn’t prevented, that’s really, really awful.

“If somebody had given me the choice in pregnancy and said ‘there’s a risk of this’, I would have stopped taking those tablets in a flash.”

Lundbeck, the manufacturer of Citalopram, says a recent review of scientific literature concluded that the drug “does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of major foetal malformations”.

“The decision not to prescribe anti-depressants to a woman who is depressed… may generate greater risks to the woman and her foetus than the risks of exposure to the medication.”

#RT via Andrea via http://www.bbc.co.uk