Search

ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the social and working lives of many. Past studies have highlighted worsening mental health during the pandemic, but often rely on small samples or infrequent follow-up. This study draws on fortnightly assessments from a large occupational cohort to describe differing trajectories of mental health between April 2020 and April 2021 and individual characteristics associated with these trajectory types.MethodsKing’s College London Coronavirus Health and Experiences of Colleagues at King’s is an occupational cohort study at a large university in London, UK. Participants (n=2241) completed online questionnaires fortnightly between April 2020 and April 2021. Symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed using Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).ResultsOn average, participants reported low levels of anxiety and depression (GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores of 0–9, consistent with ‘none’, ‘minimal’ or ‘mild’ symptoms) throughout the year, with symptoms highest in April 2020 and decreasing over the summer months when no lockdown measures were in place. However, we observed more severe and variable symptoms among subgroups of participants. Four trajectory types for anxiety and depression were identified: ‘persistent high severity’ (6%–7% of participants), ‘varying symptoms, opposing national cases’ (4%–8%), ‘varying symptoms, consistent with national cases’ (6%–11%) and ‘persistent low severity’ (74%–84%). Younger age, female gender, caring responsibilities and shielding were associated with higher severity trajectory types.ConclusionsThese data highlight differing individual responses to the pandemic and underscore the need to consider individual circumstances when assessing and treating mental health. Aggregate trends in anxiety and depression may hide greater variation and symptom severity among subgroups.

ObjectivesTo determine how workplace experiences of NHS staff varied by ethnic group during the COVID-19 pandemic and examine how these experiences are associated with mental and physical health at the time of the study.MethodsAn online Inequalities Survey was conducted by the TIDES study (Tackling Inequalities and Discrimination Experiences in health Services) in collaboration with NHS CHECK. This Inequalities Survey collected measures relating to workplace experiences (such as personal protective equipment (PPE), risk assessments, redeployments, and discrimination) as well as mental health, and physical health from NHS staff working in the 18 trusts participating with the NHS CHECK study between February and October 2021 (N=4622).ResultsRegression analysis revealed that staff from Black and Mixed/Other ethnic groups had greater odds of experiencing workplace harassment (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.43 [1.56-3.78] and 2.38 [1.12-5.07], respectively) and discrimination (AOR = 4.36 [2.73-6.96], and 3.94 [1.67-9.33], respectively) compared to White British staff. Staff from black ethnic groups also had greater odds than White British staff of reporting PPE unavailability (AOR = 2.16 [1.16-4.00]). Such workplace experiences were associated with negative physical and mental health outcomes, though this association varied by ethnicity. Conversely, understanding employment rights around redeployment, being informed about, and having the ability to inform redeployment decisions were associated with lower odds of poor health outcomes.ConclusionsStructural changes to the way staff from ethnically minoritised groups are supported, and how their complaints are addressed by leaders within the NHS are urgently required to address racism and inequalities in the NHS.Policy implicationsMaintaining transparency and implementing effective mechanisms for addressing poor working conditions, harassment, and discrimination is crucial in the NHS. This can be achieved through appointing a designated staff member, establishing a tracking system, and training HR managers in identifying and handling reports of racial discrimination. Incorporating diversity and inclusion considerations into professional development activities and providing staff with opportunities to actively participate in decision-making can also benefit their health. The NHS Workforce Race Equality Standard may need to broaden its scope to assess race equality effectively.

ObjectivesThis study reports preliminary findings on the prevalence of, and factors associated with, mental health and well-being outcomes of healthcare workers during the early months (April–June) of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.MethodsPreliminary cross-sectional data were analysed from a cohort study (n=4378). Clinical and non-clinical staff of three London-based NHS Trusts, including acute and mental health Trusts, took part in an online baseline survey. The primary outcome measure used is the presence of probable common mental disorders (CMDs), measured by the General Health Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are probable anxiety (seven-item Generalised Anxiety Disorder), depression (nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (six-item Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder checklist), suicidal ideation (Clinical Interview Schedule) and alcohol use (Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test). Moral injury is measured using the Moray Injury Event Scale.ResultsAnalyses showed substantial levels of probable CMDs (58.9%, 95% CI 58.1 to 60.8) and of PTSD (30.2%, 95% CI 28.1 to 32.5) with lower levels of depression (27.3%, 95% CI 25.3 to 29.4), anxiety (23.2%, 95% CI 21.3 to 25.3) and alcohol misuse (10.5%, 95% CI 9.2 to 11.9). Women, younger staff and nurses tended to have poorer outcomes than other staff, except for alcohol misuse. Higher reported exposure to moral injury (distress resulting from violation of one’s moral code) was strongly associated with increased levels of probable CMDs, anxiety, depression, PTSD symptoms and alcohol misuse.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that mental health support for healthcare workers should consider those demographics and occupations at highest risk. Rigorous longitudinal data are needed in order to respond to the potential long-term mental health impacts of the pandemic.

Differences in health service use between ethnic groups have been well documented, but little research has been conducted on inequalities in access to mental health services among young people. This study examines inequalities in pathways into care by ethnicity and migration status in 12–29 years old accessing health services in south east London. This study analyses anonymized electronic patient record data for patients aged 12–29 referred to a south east London mental health trust between 2008 and 2016 for an anxiety or non-psychotic depressive disorder (n = 18,931). Multinomial regression was used to examine associations between ethnicity, migration status, and both referral source and destination, stratified by age group. Young people in the Black African ethnic group were more likely to be referred from secondary health or social/criminal justice services compared to those in the White British ethnic group; the effect was most pronounced for those aged 16–17 years. Young people in the Black African ethnic group were also significantly more likely to be referred to inpatient and emergency services compared to those in the White British ethnic group. Black individuals living in south east London, particularly those who identify as Black African, are referred to mental health services via more adverse pathways than White individuals. Our findings suggest that inequalities in referral destination may be perpetuated by inequalities generated at the point of access. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00787-020-01603-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ObjectivesTo characterise the baseline King’s College London Coronavirus Health and Experiences of Colleagues at King’s cohort and describe patterns of probable depression and anxiety among staff and postgraduate research students at a large UK university in April/May 2020.MethodsAn online survey was sent to current staff and postgraduate research students via email in April 2020 (n=2590). Primary outcomes were probable depression and anxiety, measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7, respectively. Secondary outcomes were alcohol use and perceived change in mental health. Outcomes were described using summary statistics and multivariable Poisson regression was used to explore associations with six groups of predictors: demographics and prior mental health, living arrangements, caring roles, healthcare, occupational factors and COVID-19 infection. All analyses were weighted to account for differences between the sample and target population in terms of age, gender, and ethnicity.ResultsAround 20% of staff members and 30% of postgraduate research students met thresholds for probable depression or anxiety on the questionnaires. This doubled to around 40% among younger respondents aged ConclusionsOur study shows worrying levels of symptoms of depression, anxiety and alcohol use disorder in an occupational sample from a large UK university in the months following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BackgroundCOVID-19 antibody testing allows population studies to classify participants by previous SARS-CoV-2 infection status. Home lateral flow immune-antibody testing devices offer a very convenient way of doing this, but relatively little is known about how measurement and antibody variability will affect consistency in results over time. We examined consistency by looking at the outcome of two tests three months apart while COVID-19 infection rates were low (summer 2020 in the UK).MethodsThe KCL-Coronavirus Health and Experiences in Colleagues at King’s is an occupational cohort of staff and postgraduate research students. Lateral flow immune-antibody testing kits were sent to participant’s homes in late June 2020 and late September 2020. Participants also completed regular surveys that included asking about COVID-19 symptoms and whether they thought they had been infected.ResultsWe studied 1489 participants returned valid results in both June and September (59% of those sent kits). Lateral flow immune-antibody test was positive for 7.2% in June and 5.9% in September, with 3.9% positive in both. Being more symptomatic or suspecting infection increased the probability of ever being positive. Of those positive in June, 46% (49/107) were negative in September (seroreversion), and this was similar regardless of symptom characteristics, suspicion, and timing of possible infection. A possible outlier was those aged over 55 years, where only 3 of 13 (23%) had seroreversion.DiscussionThese results do not follow the pattern reported from studies specifically designed to monitor seropositivity, which have found greater consistency over time and the influence of presence, timing and severity of symptoms on seroreversion. We suggest several factors that may have contributed to this difference: our low bar in defining initial seropositivity (single test); a non-quantitative test known to have relatively low sensitivity; participants carrying out testing. We would encourage other studies to use these real-world performance characteristics alongside those from laboratory studies to plan and analyse any antibody testing.

Self-harm and suicidal ideation in children and adolescents are common and are risk factors for completed suicide. Social exclusion, which can take many forms, increases the risk of self-harm and suicidal ideation. One important marker of social exclusion in young people is school absenteeism. Whether school absenteeism is associated with these adverse outcomes, and if so to what extent, remains unclear. To determine the association between school absenteeism and both self-harm (including completed suicide) and suicidal ideation in children and adolescents, we conducted a systematic review of observational studies. We conducted meta-analysis and report a narrative synthesis where this was not possible. Meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies showed that school absenteeism was associated with an increased risk of self-harm [pooled adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval 1.20–1.57, P = 0.01] and of suicidal ideation (pooled aOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02–1.42, P = 0.03). A small number of studies showed that school absenteeism had a longitudinal association with both adverse outcomes. Heterogeneity in the exposure and outcome variables, study design and reporting was prominent and limited the extent to which it was appropriate to pool results. School absenteeism was associated with both self-harm and suicidal ideation in young people, but this evidence was derived from a small number of cross-sectional studies. Further research into the mechanisms of this association could help to inform self-harm and suicide prevention strategies at clinical, school and population levels.

Background Researchers conducting cohort studies may wish to investigate the effect of episodes of COVID-19 illness on participants. A definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 is not always available, so studies have to rely on proxy indicators. This paper seeks to contribute evidence that may assist the use and interpretation of these COVID-indicators. Methods We described five potential COVID-indicators: self-reported core symptoms, a symptom algorithm; self-reported suspicion of COVID-19; self-reported external results; and home antibody testing based on a 'lateral flow' antibody (IgG/IgM) test cassette. Included were staff and postgraduate research students at a large London university who volunteered for the study and were living in the UK in June 2020. Excluded were those who did not return a valid antibody test result. We provide descriptive statistics of prevalence and overlap of the five indicators. Results Core symptoms were the most common COVID-indicator (770/1882 participants positive, 41%), followed by suspicion of COVID-19 (n = 509/1882, 27%), a positive symptom algorithm (n = 298/1882, 16%), study antibody lateral flow positive (n = 124/1882, 7%) and a positive external test result (n = 39/1882, 2%), thus a 20-fold difference between least and most common. Meeting any one indicator increased the likelihood of all others, with concordance between 65 and 94%. Report of a low suspicion of having had COVID-19 predicted a negative antibody test in 98%, but positive suspicion predicted a positive antibody test in only 20%. Those who reported previous external antibody tests were more likely to have received a positive result from the external test (24%) than the study test (15%). Conclusions Our results support the use of proxy indicators of past COVID-19, with the caveat that none is perfect. Differences from previous antibody studies, most significantly in lower proportions of participants positive for antibodies, may be partly due to a decline in antibody detection over time. Subsequent to our study, vaccination may have further complicated the interpretation of COVID-indicators, only strengthening the need to critically evaluate what criteria should be used to define COVID-19 cases when designing studies and interpreting study results.

ObjectivesThe fit note replaced the sick note in the UK in 2010, with the aim of improving support for patients requiring sickness absence, yet there has been very little research into fit note use. This study aims to describe number of fit notes by condition, to improve our understanding of patterns of fit note use in primary care. Previous fit note research has relied on extracting diagnoses directly from fit notes, rather than extracting information from clinical records. In this paper, we extract information from clinical records to explore demographic factors and conditions associated with number of fit notes issued.DesignThis is a longitudinal study of clinical data. We analysed individual-level anonymised data from general practitioner consultations, including demographic information and condition recorded at first fit note. The latter encompassed diagnoses, individual symptoms and psychosocial issues.SettingA database called Lambeth DataNet, containing electronic clinical records on 326 415 adults (ages 16–60) from all 45 general practices within the London Borough of Lambeth from 1 January 2014 to 30 April 2017.ParticipantsOur analytical sample contained 40 698 people with a condition recorded at first fit note.Primary outcome measurePredicted number of fit notes in the period January 2014–April 2017ResultsOf all studied diagnostic groups, mental illness had the highest predicted number of fit notes (n=3.3; 95% CI: 3.1 to 3.4) after controlling for demographic factors and long-term conditions. The highest predicted number of fit notes for any condition subgroup was among patients presenting for drug and/or alcohol misuse (n=4.5; 95% CI: 4.1 to 4.8).ConclusionsFor the first time, we show drug and/or alcohol misuse at first fit note are associated with the highest number of fit notes. Research is needed to understand the trajectories of individuals at highest risk of long-term sickness absence, in particular, people presenting with drug and/or alcohol misuse.

ObjectivesThis study reports preliminary findings on the prevalence of, and factors associated with, mental health and wellbeing outcomes of healthcare workers during the early months (April-June) of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.MethodsPreliminary cross-sectional data were analysed from a cohort study (n=4,378). Clinical and non-clinical staff of three London-based NHS Trusts (UK), including acute and mental health Trusts, took part in an online baseline survey. The primary outcome measure used is the presence of probable common mental disorders (CMDs), measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Secondary outcomes are probable anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (PCL-6), suicidal ideation (CIS-R), and alcohol use (AUDIT). Moral injury is measured using the Moray Injury Event Scale (MIES).ResultsAnalyses showed substantial levels of CMDs (58.9%, 95%CI 58.1 to 60.8), and of PTSD (30.2%, 95%CI 28.1 to 32.5) with lower levels of depression (27.3%, 95%CI 25.3 to 29.4), anxiety (23.2%, 95%CI 21.3 to 25.3), and alcohol misuse (10.5%, 95%CI, 9.2 to 11.9). Women, younger staff, and nurses tended to have poorer outcomes than other staff, except for alcohol misuse. Higher reported exposure to moral injury (distress resulting from violation of one’s moral code) was strongly associated with increased levels of CMDs, anxiety, depression, PTSD symptoms, and alcohol misuse.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that mental health support for healthcare workers should consider those demographics and occupations at highest risk. Rigorous longitudinal data are needed in order to respond to the potential long-term mental health impacts of the pandemic.HighlightsWhat is already known about this subject?Large-scale population studies report increased prevalence of depression, anxiety, and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic.Evidence from previous epidemics indicates a high and persistent burden of adverse mental health outcomes among healthcare workers.What are the new findings?Substantial levels of probable common mental disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder were found among healthcare workers.Groups at increased risk of adverse mental health outcomes included women, nurses, and younger staff, as well as those who reported higher levels of moral injury.How might this impact on policy or clinical practice in the foreseeable future?The mental health offering to healthcare workers must consider the interplay of demographic, social, and occupational factors.Additional longitudinal research that emphasises methodological rigor, namely with use of standardised diagnostic interviews to establish mental health diagnoses, is necessary to better understand the mental health burden, identify those most at risk, and provide appropriate support without pathologizing ordinary distress responses.

London has unexpectedly low overall rates of self-harm in public health data and contains highly deprived areas with these paradoxically low rates. Qualitative data were collected via interviews and focus groups with 26 individuals living and working in one such area. Using the Stress Process Model, we explore why this ethnically diverse community, which is exposed to multiple, chronic stressors, might nonetheless appear to have low rates of self-harm. Participants described significant impacts of stressors on the mental health of people locally. These were partly buffered by social resources related to community solidarity and a culture of self-reliance. However, identifying oneself as mentally ill through being known to have self-harmed was seen as highly risky, diminishing a person’s social status and exposing them to additional stressors from the community and services. Consequently, people tended to hide distress, respond with behaviors less linked to mental illness, and avoid mental health services.

The lockdown and social distancing policy imposed due to the COVID-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on both mental health service delivery, and the ways in which people are accessing these services. Previous reports from the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust (SLaM; a large mental health service provider for around 1.2m residents in South London) have highlighted increased use of virtual contacts by mental health teams, with dropping numbers of face-to-face contacts over the first wave of the pandemic. There has been concern that the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic would lead to higher mental health emergencies, particularly instances of self-harm. However, with people advised to stay at home during the ‘first wave’ lockdown, it is as yet unclear whether this impacted mental health service presentations. Taking advantage of SLaM’s Clinical Records Interactive Search (CRIS) data resource with daily updates of information from its electronic mental health records, this paper describes overall presentations to Emergency Department (ED) mental health liaison teams, and those with self-harm. The paper focussed on three periods: i) a pre-lockdown period 1st February to 15th March, ii) a lockdown period 16th March to 10th May and iii) a post-lockdown period 11th May to 28th June. In summary, all attendances to EDs for mental health support decreased during the lockdown period, including those with self-harm. All types of self-harm decreased during lockdown, with self-poisoning remaining the most common. Attendances to EDs for mental health support increased post-lockdown, although were only just approaching pre-lockdown levels by the end of June 2020.

BackgroundDefinitive diagnosis of COVID-19 requires resources frequently restricted to the severely ill. Cohort studies must rely on surrogate indicators to define cases of COVID-19 in the community. We describe the prevalence and overlap of potential indicators including self-reported symptoms, suspicion, and routine test results, plus home antibody testing.MethodsAn occupational cohort of 2807 staff and postgraduate students at a large London university. Repeated surveys covering March to June 2020. Antibody test results from ‘lateral flow’ IgG/IgM cassettes in June 2020.Results1882 participants had valid antibody test results, and 124 (7%) were positive. Core symptoms of COVID-19 were common (770 participants positive, 41%), although fewer met criteria on a symptom algorithm (n=297, 16%). Suspicion of COVID-19 (n=509, 27%) was much higher than positive external tests (n=39, 2%). Positive antibody tests were rare in people who had no suspicion (n=4, 1%) or no core symptoms (n=10, 2%). In those who reported external antibody tests, 15% were positive on the study antibody test, compared with 24% on earlier external antibody tests.DiscussionOur results demonstrate the agreement between different COVID indicators. Antibody testing using lateral flow devices at home can detect asymptomatic cases and provide greater certainty to self-report; but due to weak and waning antibody responses to mild infection, may under-ascertain. Multiple indicators used in combination can provide a more complete story than one used alone. Cohort studies need to consider how they deal with different, sometimes conflicting, indicators of COVID-19 illness to understand its long-term outcomes.THUMBNAILWhat is already known on this subject?Research into the effects of COVID-19 in the community is needed to respond to the pandemic, and guidance is needed as to how cohort studies measure COVID-19 infection status retrospectively, particularly given that objective testing for infection was not widely available in the first wave of COVID-19 in many countries. Retrospective testing might be possible using antibodies as a proxy for previous COVID-19 infection.What this study adds?Antibody testing is feasible in community cohorts but sensitivity may be poor. Self-report of suspected infection, recall of symptoms and results of tests received elsewhere add different aspects to the ascertainment of COVID-19 exposure. Combining self-report and objectively measured indicators may enable tailored algorithms for COVID-19 case definition that suits the aims of different research studies.

Background Epidemiological studies show rates of self-harm through injury or poisoning vary substantially between different social contexts. Socio-economic deprivation predicts risk at individual and community level. However, despite high poverty rates, London has low rates of self-harm overall and contains highly deprived areas with paradoxically low rates. Using the stress process model as a theoretical framework, we explore why one such community exposed to multiple, chronic stressors, might nonetheless appear to have low rates of self-harm. Methods This study forms part of a wider mixed methods project which used clinical data on service use following self-harm to calculate age standardised incidence rates by small-area in South East London, 2009–2016. These were combined with the Index of Multiple Deprivation to identify a case study area that was persistently deprived with below average self-harm rates. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with fourteen people working, paid or as volunteers, within community organisations serving the area. Two focus groups were conducted with 12 people currently resident in the area. Topic guides covered aspects of the area that impacted mental health positively and negatively, how people locally responded to distress and attitudes and responses to self-harm. A thematic analysis was conducted, with themes generated following discussion between two independent coders. Results The case-study area was ethnically diverse, with a large Black population, which was reflected in the study sample. Participants reported that people in the community were exposed to multiple, chronic stressors related to marginalised social statuses and the social environment, with significant impacts on mental health. These were partly buffered by social resources related to community solidarity and an understanding of stressors as communal challenges, as well as a culture of self-reliance amongst individuals. However, identifying oneself as mentally ill, especially through being known to have intentionally harmed oneself or attempted suicide, was described as highly risky. Doing so would diminish a person’s social status in this context, exposing them to additional stressors during interactions within their community and with services. Consequently, people tended to hide mental distress and respond with behaviours less obviously linked to mental illness than self-harm. Conclusion The stressors experienced by this deprived, ethnically diverse urban community acted to both make self-harm less common and reduce help-seeking following it, despite mental distress being common. When measuring mental health need in a population the influence of social context on reported outcomes needs to be considered to avoid reinforcing existing health inequalities.

Purpose To compare sex-specific rates of hospital admission and repeat admission following self-harm between ethnic groups in London and test whether differences persist after adjustment for socio-economic deprivation. Methods A population-based cohort of all individuals aged over 11 admitted to a general hospital for physical health treatment following self-harm between 2008 and 2018, using administrative Hospital Episode Statistics for all people living in Greater London. Results There were 59,510 individuals admitted to the hospital following self-harm in the 10 year study period, ethnicity data were available for 94% of individuals. The highest rates of self-harm admission and readmission were found in the White Irish group. Rates of admission and readmission were lower in Black and Asian people compared to White people for both sexes at all ages and in all more specific Black and Asian ethnic groups compared to White British. These differences increased with adjustment for socio-economic deprivation. People of Mixed ethnicity had higher rates of readmission. Rates were highest in the 25–49 age group for Black and Mixed ethnicity men, but in under-25 s for all other groups. There were substantial differences in rates within the broader ethnic categories, especially for the Black and White groups. Conclusion In contrast to earlier UK studies, self-harm rates were not higher in Black or South Asian women, with lower self-harm admission rates seen in almost all ethnic minority groups. Differences in rates by ethnicity were not explained by socio-economic deprivation. Aggregating ethnicity into broad categories masks important differences in self-harm rates between groups.

IntroductionWe will use an occupational sample to study the impact of COVID-19 on current staff and postgraduate research students at a large UK university. The cohort study will address some of the key questions about COVID-19 for the international community, while also providing feedback to the employer and educator.Methods and analysisParticipants were recruited via email to their University email address. Administrative records were available to compare the composition of volunteer participants to underlying staff and postgraduate student populations of the University. The study comprises a baseline survey, longitudinal follow-up surveys and a viral antibody study. Baseline information was collected in April 2020 including demographics, working situation, current stresses and worries, mental health and neurological symptoms. Personal experiences of COVID-19, indirect experiences and attitudes towards the pandemic were queried, as well as satisfaction with communication and support at work. Longitudinal surveys will assess changes in COVID-19 exposure and mental health. A viral antibody detection component is being planned and will also be longitudinal in nature.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been gained from KCL’s Psychiatry, Nursing and Midwifery Research Ethics Committee (HR-19/20-18247). Participants were provided with information and agreed to a series of consent statements before enrolment. Data are kept on secure servers with access to personally identifiable information limited. Researchers may apply to have access to pseudonymised data. Findings will be disseminated internally to the University and participants, and externally through scientific publications.

Purpose Urban areas are usually found to have higher rates of self-harm, with deprivation the strongest predictor at area-level. We use a disease mapping approach to examine how self-harm is patterned within an urban area and its associations with deprivation, urbanness and ethnicity. Methods Data from clinical records on individuals admitted for self-harm for 725 small areas in South East London were included. Bayesian hierarchical models explored the spatio-temporal patterns of self-harm admission rates and potential associations with proximity to city centre, population density, percentage greenspace and non-white ethnic-minority populations. All models were adjusted for area-level deprivation, social fragmentation and hospital of admission. Results There were 8327 first admissions for self-harm during the study period. Self-harm admission rates varied fourfold across the study area, with lower rates close to the city centre [adjusted standardised admission ratio, closest versus furthest quartile 0.71(95% CrI 0.54–0.96)]. Deprivation was associated with self-harm but partially masked rather than explained the spatial pattern, which strengthened after adjustment. After adjustment for deprivation, hospital of admission and social fragmentation, greenspace, population density and ethnicity were not associated with self-harm rates. Conclusion Proximity to the city centre was associated with lower rates of self-harm, but the usual operationalisations of urbanness, population density and greenspace, were not. Deprivation did not explain the spatial patterning, nor did ethnicity. While nationally self-harm rates are higher in urban and deprived areas, this cannot be extrapolated to mean that within cities the inner-city is the highest risk area nor that risk will be principally patterned according to deprivation. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00127-018-1601-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ObjectivesTo compare the proportions of emergency department (ED) attendances following self-harm that result in admission between hospitals, examine whether differences are explained by severity of harm and examine the impact on spatial variation in self-harm rates of using ED attendance data versus admissions data.SettingA dataset of ED attendances and admissions with self-harm to four hospitals in South East London, 2009–2016 was created using linked electronic patient record data and administrative Hospital Episode Statistics.DesignProportions admitted following ED attendance and length of stay were compared. Variation and spatial patterning of age and sex standardised, spatially smoothed, self-harm rates by small area using attendance and admission data were compared and the association with distance travelled to hospital tested.ResultsThere were 20 750 ED attendances with self-harm, 7614 (37%) resulted in admission. Proportion admitted varied substantially between hospitals with a risk ratio of 2.45 (95% CI 2.30 to 2.61) comparing most and least likely to admit. This was not altered by adjustment for patient demographics, deprivation and type of self-harm. Hospitals which admitted more had a higher proportion of admissions lasting less than 24 hours (54% of all admissions at highest admitting hospital vs 35% at lowest). A previously demonstrated pattern of lower rates of self-harm admission closer to the city centre was reduced when ED attendance rates were used to represent self-harm. This was not altered when distance travelled to hospital was adjusted for.ConclusionsHospitals vary substantially in likelihood of admission after ED presentation with self-harm and this is likely due to the differences in hospital practices rather than in the patient population or severity of self-harm seen. Public health policy that directs resources based on self-harm admissions data could exacerbate existing health inequalities in inner-city areas where these data may underestimate rates relative to other areas.

Background Public health understanding of variations in self-harm prevalence between populations largely relies on routinely collected service-use data. An unexpectedly low number of hospital inpatient admissions following self-harm has been observed in inner London despite established associations of area deprivation and social fragmentation with self-harm. We aimed to measure associations between rates of attendance at an Emergency Department following self-harm and area characteristics, and to explore the processes that might underlie the incidence of self-harm observed in inner inner-city areas. Method For the spatial analysis, we created a dataset of Emergency Department attendances following self-harm from 2009 to 2016 by residents of four southeast London boroughs who were older than 11 years using linked electronic patient record data and Hospital Episode Statistics. Age-standardised and sex-standardised small-area rates of self-harm attendance (SARs) were spatially smoothed using Bayesian models and mapped. Associations with area deprivation (assessed using the Index of Multiple Deprivation) and social fragmentation (Congdon Index) were analysed. For the qualitative study, we identified a case-study area from within the four boroughs studied of four contiguous census lower super output areas (LSOAs; approximately 2600 households that were both in the most deprived quintile of areas in the UK and had below average SARs for self-harm). We undertook semi-structured interviews with 14 individuals working in community organisations and two focus groups of 12 people older than 16 years and resident in the study area, recruited through community organisations. Ethical approval for data access and linkage was granted by the Oxford Research Ethics Committee C, Clinical Records Interactive Search system Oversight Committee, and the NHS Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group. The qualitative study was given ethical approval by the King's College London, Psychiatry, Nursing and Midwifery Subcommittee. Findings We identified 20 750 Emergency Department attendances following self-harm by 12 577 individuals. The ratio of SARs in the highest versus the lowest 5% of areas was 2·87 (95% credible interval [CrI] 2·65–3·13). Associations with self-harm were found for area deprivation (most vs least deprived quintile: rate ratio 2·07, 95% CrI 1·88–2·26) and social fragmentation (1·39, 1·23–1·56); however, we identified clusters of deprived areas with a low incidence of self-harm Emergency Department attendance. Preliminary qualitative analysis suggests that individuals in the case-study population have substantial cumulative stressors and mental health difficulties despite a low incidence of Emergency Department presentation for self-harm (SARs for the four LSOAs ranged from 0·80 to 0·94 before adjustment for deprivation and 0·68–0·81 after adjustment). Frequent experiences of violence and an emphasis on appearing tough combine with discomfort with talking about self-harm and fear of negative treatment by mental health and other services, particularly within the Caribbean and African population who make up 44% of the local population. These factors might make people more likely to respond to distress in ways not defined by researchers as self-harm (even if they are also damaging); equally, these pressures might make individuals who self-harm less likely to identify themselves to services. Interpretation Relying on service-use data for self-harm risks underestimating the extent of distress and subsequent harmful behaviours in some deprived urban populations already disadvantaged by high levels of violence and minority ethnic and migrant status. Funding National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London.

Background The prevalence of self-harm among children and young people in the UK is increasing, with few accessing formal support. Drivers of self-harm remain poorly understood, and evidence-based opportunities to intervene are scarce. We aimed to identify factors associated with self-harm in young people to inform local action. Methods In this retrospective, observational study, we identified 196 residents of the south London Borough of Lambeth, aged 12–26 years, presenting to two emergency departments for injuries related to self-harm in the 2015–16 financial year (April 1, 2015, to March 31, 2016). A pragmatic sample size of 100 was selected via computer randomisation for further analysis. Electronic mental health records were retrospectively analysed using a data collection protocol that was validated with researchers before data collection. Demographics and psychiatric history were obtained from pre-coded databases linking electronic mental health records and Hospital Episode Statistics data on emergency department attendance for self-harm. Presentation details and social risk factors were derived from assessment of case notes pertaining to the 2 weeks after first presentation; we noted any risk factors that had been positively recorded. Data relating to the individual's first presentation within the study period were used; subsequent attendances were not included in the sample. We analysed the data using descriptive statistics. Ethical approval for data access and linkage was granted by the Oxford Research Ethics Committee C (18/SC/0372), Clinical Records Interactive Search system Oversight Committee (project numbers 14–026 and 19–004), and the National Health Service (NHS) Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group (reference ECC 3–04(f)/2011). This study received approval as an audit project through Southwark Operational Directorate in the South London and Maudsley Foundation NHS Trust. Findings 48 (48%) of the 100 selected participants had documented experience of psychological trauma, including exposure to violence. 18 (18%) lived in unstable accommodation, and 20 (20%) were known to social services. Difficulties at home (16 [16%]) and stress relating to housing, school, or financial pressures (13 [13%]) were common documented triggers for the self-harm episode at presentation. Peer influence was rarely noted, although 27 (27%) had recorded experience of bullying. Interpretation Adverse life experiences were prevalent and align with wider population prevalence estimates. Common triggers for self-harm relate to home and school environment and wider socioeconomic stressors, supporting the link between wider determinants of health and self-harm, and contributing to the case for public health action. Risk factors and triggers identified provide potential areas for additional targeted support to prevent development or escalation of self-harm behaviours. Funding UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, and King's College London.

Purpose Fear of crime and perceived neighbourhood disorder have been linked to common mental illness (CMI). However, few UK studies have also considered the experience of crime at the individual and neighbourhood level. This study aims to identify individual and local area factors associated with increased perceived neighbourhood disorder and test associations between CMI and individuals’ perceptions of disorder in their neighbourhoods, personal experiences of crime and neighbourhood crime rates. Methods A cross-sectional survey was conducted of 1,698 adults living in 1,075 households in Lambeth and Southwark, London. CMI was assessed using the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule. Data were analysed using multilevel logistic regression with neighbourhood defined as lower super output area. Results Individuals who reported neighbourhood disorder were more likely to suffer CMI (OR 2.12) as were those with individual experience of crime. These effects remained significant when individual characteristics were controlled for. While 14 % of the variance in perceived neighbourhood disorder occurred at the neighbourhood level, there was no significant variance at this level for CMI. Conclusions Perceived neighbourhood disorder is more common in income-deprived areas and individuals who are unemployed. Worry about one’s local area and individual experience of crime are strongly and independently associated with CMI, but neighbourhood crime rates do not appear to impact on mental health.

Positron emission tomography (PET) studies have reported an association between reduced striatal dopamine D2/3 receptor availability and higher scores on self-report measures of trait impulsivity in healthy adults. However, impulsivity is a multi-faceted construct, and it is unclear which aspect(s) of impulsivity might be driving these associations. The current study aimed to investigate the relationship between limbic (ventral) striatal D2/3 receptor availability and individual components of impulsivity (attentional, motor and non-planning) using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) and [(11)C]raclopride PET in 23 healthy volunteers. A partial correlational analysis showed a significant association between non-planning impulsiveness (lack of forethought or 'futuring') and limbic D2/3 receptor availability, which was only apparent after the exclusion of potential dissimulators (indexed by high scores on impression management). Our findings suggest that non-planning impulsiveness is associated with individual variation in limbic striatal D2/3 receptor availability and that different facets of impulsivity may have specific neurochemical correlates. Future studies that combine D2/3 receptor imaging with behavioral measures of impulsivity are required to further elucidate the precise relationship between individual components of trait impulsivity and brain dopaminergic function.

Background: Self-harm is a significant public health concern in the UK. This is reflected in the recent addition to the English Public Health Outcomes Framework of rates of attendance at Emergency Departments (EDs) following self-harm. However there is currently no source of data to measure this outcome. Routinely available data for inpatient admissions following self-harm miss the majority of cases presenting to services. We aimed to investigate (i) if a dataset of ED presentations could be produced using a combination of routinely collected clinical and administrative data and (ii) to validate this dataset against another one produced using methods similar to those used in previous studies. Methods: Using the Clinical Record Interactive Search system, the electronic health records (EHRs) used in four EDs were linked to Hospital Episode Statistics to create a dataset of attendances following self-harm. This dataset was compared with an audit dataset of ED attendances created by manual searching of ED records. The proportion of total cases detected by each dataset was compared. Results: There were 1932 attendances detected by the EHR dataset and 1906 by the audit. The EHR and audit datasets detected 77 % and 76 % of all attendances respectively and both detected 82 % of individual patients. There were no differences in terms of age, sex, ethnicity or marital status between those detected and those missed using the EHR method. Both datasets revealed more than double the number of self-harm incidents than could be identified from inpatient admission records. Conclusions: It was possible to use routinely collected EHR data to create a dataset of attendances at EDs following self-harm. The dataset detected the same proportion of attendances and individuals as the audit dataset, proved more comprehensive than the use of inpatient admission records, and did not show a systematic bias in those cases it missed.

This study investigates evidence of a selective influence of mental health in meeting residential mobility preferences. Data from two waves of Understanding Society (the UK Household Longitudinal Study) were used to identify four preference-mobility groups ('desired stayers', 'entrapped', 'desired movers', 'displaced'). Associations between mental health (symptoms of common mental disorder, CMD) and preference-mobility groups were measured both before and after residential moves. Those identified with CMD at baseline were at greater risk of being both in the 'entrapped' and the 'desired mover' groups, relative to the 'desired stayer' group in the following year. The association between preference-mobility group and subsequent poorer mental health was found among both groups that failed to meet their mobility preferences ('entrapped' and 'displaced'). This study finds evidence for a selective influence of mental health - such that those with poorer mental health are less likely to achieve a desired residential move, and highlights the importance of considering a bidirectional relationship between residential mobility and mental health.

At the current level of membership examination fees at the Royal College of Psychiatrists, a resident in psychiatry who passes every part first time pays a total of £2136.[1][1] These costs are intended to cover only expenses rather than to generate profit, a message which many of us have accepted