Search

This paper examines the role of physical therapy in the management of low-back pain (LBP) by reviewing current evidence and discussing best practices. It explores the various physical therapy interventions, including exercise therapy, manual therapy, education, and behavioral approaches, and their effectiveness in reducing pain, improving function, and promoting long-term recovery. The paper also highlights the importance of individualized treatment plans, multidisciplinary collaboration, and patient engagement in optimizing the outcomes of physical therapy interventions for LBP

Patient microaggressions affect practitioners in all fields of healthcare and especially psychiatry. In multiple studies, healthcare professionals reported high rates of patient microaggressions and discrimination. To date, this is the first scoping review of recommendations and trainings on patient microaggressions. A scoping review of articles indexed in PubMed, PsycINFO, Medline, ERIC, and MedEdPORTAL was conducted from July 2020 to August 2020 to identify recommendations and solutions for healthcare professionals on responding to patient microaggressions. The review identified 27 studies that provide recommendations and trainings for healthcare professionals to address patient microaggressions. Twenty studies outlined recommendations for healthcare professionals and systems on how to respond to patient offenses. These 20 studies were grouped into establishing a supportive culture, addressing the microaggression, supporting the targets of microaggressions, discriminatory requests, and institutional responses. Six articles described trainings that equip providers with tools to address patient microaggressions, including the ERASE framework (“Expect/Recognize/Address/Support/Establish, Encourage”); Stop, Talk, and Roll; interrupting microaggressions; XYZ (“I felt X when Y because Z”); the ACTION model (“Ask/Come/Tell/Impact/Own/Next”); and the OWTFD tool (“Observe/Why/Think/Feel/Desire”). Recommendations and trainings for the response to microaggressions are emerging, and results of trainings are encouraging. However, more work is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of these trainings in clinical settings and longitudinally.

Background The suicide rate among Veterans is 1.5 times greater than that for civilians, partly a result of the high use of firearms as the means for suicide. One effective strategy to reduce Veteran suicide by firearms is to provide counseling on firearm safety as a method of means reduction. However, many clinicians do not discuss firearm safety with Veterans. Aims This study evaluates a one-hour educational seminar for clinicians on lethal means safety. Materials and methods One hundred and ninety clinicians from the Veterans Health Administration, including social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, and nurses, participated in the training. The seminar was streamed during the South Central Mental Health Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center's Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mental Health Grand Rounds, for which participants were eligible for continuing education units. Data were collected immediately after the training and four months later. Results After completing the training, participants believed that it was important to speak with Veterans about firearm safety and felt knowledgeable and empowered to do so. Four months after the seminar, participants had counseled, on average, over half of Veterans treated about lethal means safety. Discussion Participants reported the value of normalizing discussions about firearm safety with their Veterans and focusing on the safety aspect while discussing firearms. Conclusions This webinar was effective in providing clinicians the skills to talk with Veterans about firearm safety and continued to impact their practice four months after training. The training is available for free on our website at https://www.mirecc.va.gov/visn16/public-health-approach-to-firearms-and-death-by-suicide.asp.

Advancing Health Equity Through Innovations and Technology This year’s summit was unique given the COVID-19 pandemic: a major global outbreak that has imposed severe restrictions in all aspects of our life. At the outset, we were faced with three mutually exclusive options. First option was to cancel the summit in its entirety: this was the easiest and most obvious choice once the COVID-19 pandemic forced a near total lockdown all over the country with unprecedented disruptions of normal daily activities as the disease announced its thunderous touchdown on United States (US) soil. It was also the most-logical response faced with uncertainty regarding summit logistics and expected poor attendance due to the raging pandemic. Second option was to conduct a digital summit restricted to local audiences at Baylor College of Medicine: this option entailed implementing a virtual summit with attendance restricted to participants from our institution only. It sounded like a reasonable choice but that would impede the presence of diversity of topics, perspectives, insights and experiential learning opportunities, which are what render the summit exciting and worth attending. And finally, the last option was to conduct a digital unrestricted summit open to all interested audiences throughout the US. The conduct of a virtual summit open to all participants from around the country was initially considered daunting given the likelihood of amplified technical problems associated with an array of internet access differentials around the country, which would require a strong Information Technology (IT) presence throughout the sessions. Nonetheless, the attractiveness of going national with a virtual summit, despite the pandemic and logistical challenges, slowly gained converts and became the dominant choice. The response and level of participation in this first virtual summit showed an unanticipated surge despite the increase in registration fees to cover IT costs. This year, we had attendees from all regions of the US as well as from the United Kingdom. The range of topics was quite diverse encompassing health disparities in relation to cancers, nutrition, musculo-skeletal disorders, amputation rates, vaccination uptakes and COVID-19 infections. Various solutions were passionately presented to address these disparities including novel health technologies, community engagement and partnerships, improvement in health literacy and alternative therapeutics. There were no hitches despite the complex breakout sessions, and above all, attendees were satisfied and offered outstanding evaluation scores. This was definitely a summit that metamorphosed from pessimism to a triumphant success! Copyright © 2020 Salihu et al. Published by Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in this journal, is properly cited.

Older adults in the United States have lower rates of mental health care utilization than young adults. To understand these lower rates of mental health care, we performed a systematic review, in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, of barriers that prevent older adults from seeking and accessing treatment. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Clinical Key to identify studies of barriers to mental health treatment in the older adult population (in individuals 50 y of age and older). Thirty-two articles met inclusion criteria (English language and focused on barriers to care in older adults) and exclusion criteria (focus on non-United States populations, focus on younger adults, or no focus on barriers to care). We identified 5 categories of barriers to mental health care in older adults: (1) attitudes and knowledge among older adults; (2) comorbid medical conditions; (3) provider-related factors; (4) other extrinsic barriers (eg, cost, transportation, reliance on caregivers); and (5) unique factors that affect older adults in minority populations. Large studies have primarily identified intrinsic barriers, including negative attitudes toward mental health care and lack of perceived need for treatment, as preventing older adults from seeking mental health care. Minority populations have also been found to face cultural barriers and increased levels of stigma compared with non-Hispanic whites, although several of the identified articles concerning barriers among minority older adults involved qualitative studies with small samples. Larger quantitative studies may help clarify the relative importance of barriers affecting this population. Interventions that have been shown to increase access to mental health services for older adults include community-based care and integrated primary and psychiatric care, but these strategies can be difficult to implement in low-resource settings. More research is needed to determine which interventions and policies are most effective in targeting particular barriers.

The goal of this study was to explore how prepared psychiatry programs are to teach residents to practice resource management and high-value, cost-effective care. An anonymous online survey was sent to 187 psychiatry training directors between July and September 2015. Forty-four percent of training directors responded to the survey. While most training directors who responded (88%) agreed that that graduate medical education has a responsibility to respond to the rising cost of health care, fewer than half agreed that that their faculty members consistently model cost-effective care (48%), that residents have access to information regarding the cost of tests and procedures (32%), and that residents are prepared to integrate the cost of care with available evidence when making medical decisions (44%). Only 11% reported providing training in resource management. Barriers cited to teaching cost-effective care included a lack of information regarding health care costs (45%), a lack of time (24%), a lack of faculty with relevant skills (19%), and competing training demands and priorities (18%). Training directors also noted a lack of available curricular resources and assessment tools (21%). Another 12% cited concerns about cost containment overriding treatment guidelines. Ninety percent of training directors agreed that they would be interested in resources to help teach high-value, cost-effective care. Most psychiatry programs do not provide formal training in resource management but are interested in resources to teach high-value, cost-effective care. Curricula for residents and faculty may help meet this need.