Prevalence, predictors and types of unpleasant and adverse effects of meditation in regular meditators: international cross-sectional study

BackgroundMeditation 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.AimsThe 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.MethodThe 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.ResultsSimilar 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).ConclusionsThis 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.

Which Non-Pharmaceutical Primary Care Interventions Reduce Inequalities in Common Mental Health Disorders? A Protocol for a Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Common mental health disorders (CMDs) represent a major public health concern and are particularly prevalent in people experiencing disadvantage or marginalisation. Primary care is the first point of contact for people with CMDs. Pharmaceutical interventions, such as antidepressants, are commonly used in the treatment of CMDs; however, there is concern that these treatments are over-prescribed and ineffective for treating mental distress related to social conditions. Non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions, such as psychological therapies and “social prescribing”, provide alternatives for CMDs. Little is known, however, about which such interventions reduce social inequalities in CMD-related outcomes, and which may, unintentionally, increase them. The aim of this protocol (PROSPERO registration number CRD42021281166) is to describe how we will undertake a systematic review to assess the effects of non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions on CMD-related outcomes and social inequalities. A systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods primary studies will be undertaken and reported according to the PRISMA-Equity guidance. The following databases will be searched: Assia, CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PsycInfo and Scopus. Retrieved records will be screened according to pre-defined eligibility criteria and synthesised using a narrative approach, with meta-analysis if feasible. The findings of this review will guide efforts to commission more equitable mental health services.

A Patient Stratification Approach to Identifying the Likelihood of Continued Chronic Depression and Relapse Following Treatment for Depression

Background: Subgrouping methods have the potential to support treatment decision making for patients with depression. Such approaches have not been used to study the continued course of depression or likelihood of relapse following treatment. Method: Data from individual participants of seven randomised controlled trials were analysed. Latent profile analysis was used to identify subgroups based on baseline characteristics. Associations between profiles and odds of both continued chronic depression and relapse up to one year post-treatment were explored. Differences in outcomes were investigated within profiles for those treated with antidepressants, psychological therapy, and usual care. Results: Seven profiles were identified; profiles with higher symptom severity and long durations of both anxiety and depression at baseline were at higher risk of relapse and of chronic depression. Members of profile five (likely long durations of depression and anxiety, moderately-severe symptoms, and past antidepressant use) appeared to have better outcomes with psychological therapies: antidepressants vs. psychological therapies (OR (95% CI) for relapse = 2.92 (1.24–6.87), chronic course = 2.27 (1.27–4.06)) and usual care vs. psychological therapies (relapse = 2.51 (1.16–5.40), chronic course = 1.98 (1.16–3.37)). Conclusions: Profiles at greater risk of poor outcomes could benefit from more intensive treatment and frequent monitoring. Patients in profile five may benefit more from psychological therapies than other treatments.

The Adaptation of a Measure of Confidence in Assessing, Formulating, and Managing Suicide Risk

Background: To date little has been done to evaluate the effectiveness of suicide risk formulation training. Aims: We aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of a new scale measuring clinicians' confidence in assessing, formulating, and managing suicide risk. Method: A total of 128 mental health practitioners from an UK National Health Service Trust completed the scale. Of them, 85 from an Improving Access to Psychological Therapies service did so before and after training in Risk Assessment, Formulation, and Management (RAFM); 28 practitioners from the Older Adults service also completed the measure. For test–retest analysis, a further 15 completed the scale again 1 week after baseline without attending any training. Of the training group, 52 (61%) completed the measure at the 6-month follow-up. Results: Analysis indicated a single-factor structure, good test–retest reliability, and statistically significant increases in confidence between pre- and posttraining and between pretraining and 6 month follow-up. Cohen's effect size values suggest a moderate-to-large effect. Limitations: The relatively small sample sizes indicate that this study should be considered a preliminary investigation of a new measure, which warrants further replication. Conclusion: This measure could be useful in gauging practitioners' confidence in the RAFM approach and in evaluating and developing training.

Self-medication with cannabidiol (CBD) and associated treatments in the self-care of anxiety in women from Mexico City: A qualitative study

Introduction. The popular use of marijuana and its components (THC and CBD) for medicinal purposes is often regarded as irresponsible and ignorant. However, in this paper, it is conceptualized and studied as medical knowledge of self-care, in which it is linked to different therapeutic knowledge from conventional and alternative medicine to treat anxiety. Objective. This article reports on a qualitative research project designed to analyze the practices and risks of self-medication with CBD, and its links with medical treatments and self-care measures for dealing with anxiety in adult women in Mexico City. Method. Eleven adult women, mostly professionals, diagnosed with anxiety, participated in the study. In-depth interviews were conducted to learn how women use therapeutic resources to cope with anxiety in their everyday lives. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using ATLAS ti 7 software. Results. Self-medication is part of a self-care process with several facets: the experience of symptoms, self-diagnosis, the use of various remedies (dosage and administration), and their evaluation. During this process, women use a range of medication, psychological therapies, herbalism, acupuncture, yoga, and sleep hygiene measures, including CBD, either as an alternative or an adjunct to biomedical pharmacology, with or without medical supervision. Certain risks were identified, such as the use of CBD that may be incorrectly labeled or interact dangerously with other self-prescribed substances. Discussion and conclusion. These results coincide with those of various authors who equate self-care with a first level of care, which has risks that could be reduced by controlling misleading marketing and developing professional medical services, which are trained and accessible to users, who could inform them about the medicinal use, scope and risks of CBD or THC for health.

Closing the circle: a key collaborative opportunity for general practice and psychiatry

Two of the authors were general practitioners (GPs) in the 1980s, when there was much interest in consultation, stimulated by the psychoanalyst Michael Balint. Around one in five psychiatrists worked in consultation liaison in general practice at that time, but in the 1990s this was stopped to increase the focus on psychosis. However, the Royal College of Psychiatrists and Royal College of General Practitioners have a strong history of collaboration, and many psychiatrists, nurses and GPs trained together in the national Trailblazers programme, focusing on service delivery in all areas of mental health. Recent proposals for mental health community collaborative networks from the NHS provide an opportunity for psychiatrists to work with GPs and a range of other professionals once more, for complex non-psychotic illness that cannot be helped by Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services. The circle is closing for GPs like us, who were working in the 1980s.

Understanding the psychological therapy treatment outcomes for young adults who are not in education, employment, or training (NEET), moderators of outcomes, and what might be done to improve them

Background To determine: whether young adults (aged 18–24) not in education, employment or training (NEET) have different psychological treatment outcomes to other young adults; any socio-demographic or treatment-related moderators of differential outcomes; and whether service-level changes are associated with better outcomes for those who are NEET. Methods A cohort was formed of 20 293 young adults treated with psychological therapies in eight Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services. Pre-treatment characteristics, outcomes, and moderators of differential outcomes were compared for those who were and were not NEET. Associations between outcomes and the following were assessed for those that were NEET: missing fewer sessions, attending more sessions, having a recorded diagnosis, and waiting fewer days between referral and starting treatment. Results Those who were NEET had worse outcomes: odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for reliable recovery = 0.68 (0.63–0.74), for deterioration = 1.41 (1.25–1.60), and for attrition = 1.31 (1.19–1.43). Ethnic minority participants that were NEET had better outcomes than those that were White and NEET. Living in deprived areas was associated with worse outcomes. The intensity of treatment (high or low) did not moderate outcomes, but having more sessions was associated with improved outcomes for those that were NEET: odds (per one-session increase) of reliable recovery = 1.10 (1.08–1.12), deterioration = 0.94 (0.91–0.98), and attrition = 0.68 (0.66–0.71). Conclusions Earlier treatment, supporting those that are NEET to attend sessions, and in particular, offering them more sessions before ending treatment might be effective in improving clinical outcomes. Additional support when working with White young adults that are NEET and those in more deprived areas may also be important.