Search results

A quantitative observational study was conducted. The purpose of this study is to examine the continuing adherence to the stopping over-medication of people with intellectual disability and/or autism guidelines for a cohort of outpatients seen in the outpatients’ clinics in the two teams who participated in this study to review the trend of psychotropic prescribing with a prescription indication along with the utilisation of non-pharmacological interventions.

Data was retrospectively collected over a period of one year for patients sampled conveniently in the outpatient’s clinic. The data was collected from two sites from psychiatric letters to the general practitioners (GPs), with the focus being psychotropic prescription indication and their adherence to British National Formulary limits, inclusion of a wider multi-disciplinary team or MDT (including nurses, psychologists and health support workers), use of Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale for assessing medication side effects and response to treatment.

Most of the patients had at least one review in the previous six months. Antipsychotics were the highest prescribed medications without an indication for their use (13.3%) followed by anxiolytics and other medications. CGI recording was suboptimal, with 26% of the patient population did not have medication side effects and effectiveness monitored through this method. In total, 41% of patients were open to community nurses followed by other disciplines.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is an original article following the pilot study completed by the authors.

This study aims to investigate how institutional and organisational factors affect case management of patients with mental disorders by GPs in Italy and Spain. The paper highlights the importance of improving the effectiveness of primary care to ensure easy access to mental health services, which is crucial in responding to the increasing incidence of mental disorders and preventing negative outcomes.

This article details a qualitative research study that examines the management of patients with mental disorders by general practitioners (GPs) in Italy and Spain, using cross-national comparison and in-depth interviews with GPs as research methods.

The study revealed that Italian self-employed GPs have more scheduling autonomy than Spanish Health Centre GPs. Both face high work pressure and resource scarcity, highlighting the need for targeted training. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rise in phone consultations.

This study provides novel insights into mental health management by examining the case management of patients with mental disorders by GPs in Italy and Spain, with a focus on the impact of institutional and organisational factors. The cross-national comparison and in-depth interviews enhance the originality of the study, offering a nuanced understanding of the constraints faced by GPs in their work context. Furthermore, the comparison of the similar primary care frameworks of Italy and Spain may offer insight into their evolution.