Community mental health centers (CMHCs) offer invaluable, publicly-funded treatment for serious mental illness (SMI). Unfortunately, evidence-based psychological treatments are often not delivered at CMHCs, in part due to implementation barriers, such as limited time, high caseloads, and complex clinical presentations. Transdiagnostic treatments may help address these barriers, because they allow providers to treat symptoms across multiple disorders concurrently. However, little research has investigated CMHC providers\' experiences of delivering transdiagnostic treatments \"on the ground,\" particularly for adults with SMI. Thus, the aim of the present study was to assess CMHC providers\' perspectives on delivering a transdiagnostic treatment - the Transdiagnostic Intervention for Sleep and Circadian Dysfunction (TranS-C) - to adults diagnosed with SMI. In the context of a larger parent trial, providers were randomized to deliver a standard version of TranS-C (Standard TranS-C) or a version adapted to the CMHC context (Adapted TranS-C). Twenty-five providers from the parent trial participated in a semi-structured interview (n = 10 Standard TranS-C; n = 15 from Adapted TranS-C). Responses were deductively and inductively coded to identify themes related to Proctor\'s taxonomy of implementation outcomes. Four novel \"transdiagnostic take homes\" were identified: (1) transdiagnostic targets, such as sleep, can be perceived as motivating and appropriate when treating SMI, (2) strategies to bolster client motivation/adherence and address a wider range of symptom severity may improve transdiagnostic treatments, (3) balancing feasibility with offering in-depth resources is an important challenge for transdiagnostic treatment development, and (4) adapting transdiagnostic treatments to the CMHC context may improve provider perceptions of implementation outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: Spain healthcare system is decentralized, with seventeen autonomous regions overseeing healthcare. However, penitentiary healthcare is managed nationally, except in Catalonia, the Basque Country, and Navarra. These variations impact mental health care provision for inmates with serious mental illness (SMI).
UNASSIGNED: To delineate differences between regions in terms of mental health care provision for individuals with SMI, available resources, and the perspectives of healthcare professionals operating in the Spanish prison environment.
UNASSIGNED: Employing an explanatory sequential mixed-method approach, the study conducted an extensive literature review, quantitative data collection through structured questionnaires, and qualitative data collection via focus groups and four in-depth interviews. Analysis involved calculating percentages and ratios for quantitative data and thematic analysis for qualitative data interpretation to comprehensively understand mental healthcare provision.
UNASSIGNED: In December 2021, about 4% of inmates in Spain had SMI. There are three distinct models of mental healthcare within the Spanish prison system. The traditional penitentiary model, representing 83% of the incarcerated population, operates independently under the General Secretariat of Penitentiary Institutions at a national level. This model relies on an average of 5.2 penitentiary General Practitioners (pGP) per 1,000 inmates for psychiatric and general healthcare. External psychiatrists are engaged for part-time psychiatric assessment. Acute psychiatric hospitalization occurs in general nursing modules within penitentiary centers or in Restricted Access Units (RAUs) in reference hospitals. Two penitentiary psychiatric hospitals provide care to unimputable SMI inmates from all over Spain. Innovative penitentiary models, constituting 17% of the prison population, integrate penitentiary healthcare within regional public health systems. The Basque Country features a Mental Health Unit with full-time care teams within the penitentiary center. Catalonia emphasizes community care, providing full-time dedicated psychiatric services within and outside prisons, ensuring continued care in the community. Both models prioritize personnel with specialized mental health training and compensation akin to non-prison healthcare settings.
UNASSIGNED: Regional disparities in penitentiary mental healthcare models in Spain result in resource inequalities, impacting specialized care for inmates with SMI and opportunities for healthcare professionals. The models in the Basque Country and Catalonia offer valuable experiences for penitentiary healthcare.

Objective: Serious mental illness (SMI) remains a leading cause of disability worldwide. However, there is limited Australian evidence of community-based programs to enhance the psychosocial wellbeing of adults experiencing SMI. Foundations is a long-term community-based psychosocial outreach support program delivered in Tasmania, Australia. A longitudinal non-randomised controlled trial was conducted to examine the effectiveness of the Foundations program on adults\' psychosocial functioning, clinical symptomology, and hospital readmissions, in comparison to standard care only. Method: Participants were adults aged 18-64 years experiencing SMI. Control participants received standard clinical care only. Intervention participants were engaged in the Foundations program in addition to standard care. Data were collected at program commencement, midpoint, closure, and six-months post-closure. Linear mixed modelling was used to examine differences between groups. Results: Intervention participants achieved better psychosocial functioning in comparison to the control group by program closure and at six-month follow-up. No significant differences were observed for clinical mental health symptomology or hospital readmission rates. Length of readmission stay was significantly shorter for intervention participants. Conclusions: The findings highlight the additional value of community-based, recovery-oriented, psychosocial outreach support alongside clinical mental health care to enhance the psychosocial wellbeing of adults experiencing SMI.

UNASSIGNED: This report uses data from Mental Disorders Prevalence Study (MDPS), a large epidemiologic study that provided national prevalence estimates of seven mental disorders based on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 (SCID), to assess the odds of treatment disruption during COVID for SMI and non-SMI groups.
UNASSIGNED: This cross-sectional study conducted from 2020 to 2022 included 2,810 household participants with any lifetime mental health treatment. Weighted logistic regressions estimated the odds of reporting disruptions in access to mental health care or psychotropic prescriptions due to COVID. SMI was broadly defined as having an MDP diagnosis and serious functional impairment (GAF ≤50, a validated and widely used cutoff). Non-SMI groups were a mental diagnosis without serious impairment (MDPS diagnosis, GAF >50) and any lifetime treatment and no serious impairment (no MDPS diagnosis, GAF >50).
UNASSIGNED: The SMI and mental disorder without serious impairment groups had approximately 6.4- and 2.4-greater odds, respectively, of reporting inability to access mental health care and 4- and 3- greater odds, respectively, of having prescriptions delayed, relative to the group with any lifetime treatment. Among those with serious mental illness, having Medicare insurance increased the odds of reporting inability to access mental health care.
UNASSIGNED: Individuals with SMI were much more likely to experience treatment disruptions throughout the pandemic than non-SMI groups.

The challenges faced by caregivers of people living with serious mental illness in Canada are well documented in the literature including emotional distress, financial strain, social isolation, and concerns about their physical health following the impact of caregiving. Peer support programs (including peer support groups) emerged as a promising method to attempt to address these challenges. While there is evidence on the positive impacts of peer support groups in providing support for caregivers, the mechanisms by which peer support groups operate and influence support for caregivers of people living with serious mental illness are less understood. This qualitative study took on a co-designed participatory research approach. Fifteen adult caregivers of people living with serious mental illness across Canada were engaged through key informant interviews that lasted for 45 - 60 min each. A thematic analysis was carried out to help understand the operational mechanisms of peer support groups in influencing support for caregivers. The key informant interviews allowed for the identification and description of the following operational mechanisms that influenced the support caregivers received from peer support groups: (1) Group dynamics; (2) Messaging/content; (3) Equity and inclusion, (4) Group philosophy; and (5) Privacy concerns. Findings from this study showed that caregivers identified a number of operational mechanisms of peer support groups that explained how they felt supported when they participated in peer support groups. Among other operational mechanisms, group dynamics in terms of the gathering of caregivers of different age brackets and varying caregiving experience negatively influenced the peer support experience of caregivers. This pointed to the need for group dynamics that consider close age ranges and similar caregiving experience during group meetings to enhance support for caregivers. Caregivers also identified a gap in equity and inclusion in peer support groups that could have otherwise enriched their experience and enhanced the support they looked to receive from the group. Practical examples to enhance equity and inclusion include promoting active listening, using inclusive language, encouraging diverse representation and asking for feedback from peer support group members. While peer support groups in Canada exist independently of one another, it may help to consolidate evidence-based recommendations in the operational mechanisms of these groups, for the benefit of caregivers who turn to these groups for support, having been left on their own by an otherwise fractured mental health system.

UNASSIGNED: Stigma toward schizophrenia spectrum disorders is pervasive and negatively influences service access and delivery. Cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia (CIAS) is common, but its association with stigma is unknown. In this study, the authors examined whether individuals with CIAS receiving cognitive remediation treatment report experiencing CIAS-related stigma and sought to establish associations between CIAS-related stigma and recovery-relevant outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Data from 48 individuals with schizophrenia spectrum diagnoses were drawn from a larger study evaluating cognitive remediation. Participants completed measures of CIAS-related stigma, internalized mental illness stigma, self-perceived cognitive impairment, cognitive performance, and interviewer-rated quality of life.
UNASSIGNED: CIAS-related stigma was commonly reported and significantly positively associated with internalized stigma and self-perceived cognitive impairment. CIAS-related stigma was also significantly negatively associated with motivation to engage in goal-directed behavior and daily activities.
UNASSIGNED: CIAS-related stigma exists and warrants additional exploration with regard to implications for psychiatric service delivery.

OBJECTIVE: Young adults with serious mental illness (SMI) have poor physical health and high Emergency Department (ED) and hospital utilization. Integrating primary care into community mental health care may be an important form of early intervention.
METHODS: Adjusted multivariable regressions assessed changes in self-reported annual primary care, ED and hospital utilization for 83 young adults with SMI enrolled in integrated care.
RESULTS: Participants\' mean annual per person utilization changed significantly as follows: primary care visits, from 1.8 to 3.6, p < .001; medical ED visits, from 1.0 to 0.6, p < .01; psychiatric ED visits from 0.6 to 0.2, p < .001; medical inpatient days, from 1.2 to 0.1, p < .001 and psychiatric inpatient days, from 6.3 to 2.6, p < .001.
CONCLUSIONS: Young adults with SMI receiving integrated care increased primary care and reduced ED and inpatient utilization. Future controlled research is warranted to further assess integrated care for young adults with SMI.

Undertreated medical illnesses can compound the disabling cognitive deficits of schizophrenia. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) impairs cognitive domains also affected by schizophrenia, is common, and is treatable. The effects of sleep apnea on cognition in schizophrenia, however, are not well understood. We estimated the prevalence of OSA in a previously characterized sample of 3942 Veterans with schizophrenia by self-report and with a predictive model to identify individuals at high risk for OSA. We then compared neuropsychological and functional capacity assessment results between those who reported OSA versus those who did not, and between those predicted to have OSA versus predicted to not have OSA. We expected that many Veterans not reporting sleep apnea would be predicted to have it, and that both reported and predicted sleep apnea would be associated with lower cognitive and functional performance. The reported prevalence of OSA in the sample was 14%, whereas 72% were predicted to be at high risk of OSA. Interestingly, participants who reported having OSA had better cognitive and functional capacity performance (p\'s < 0.001) compared to those who did not report OSA, particularly on speed of processing assessments (p < 0.001). Predicted OSA, by contrast, was associated with lower speed of processing, verbal learning and working memory test scores (p\'s < 0.001). One possible interpretation of these results is that people with higher cognitive capacity may be more likely to seek medical care, while those with cognitive impairments are at greater risk for having untreated co-occurring medical conditions that further compromise cognition.

Group-based Metacognitive Reflection and Insight Therapy (MERITg) is the group application of Metacognitive Reflection and Insight Therapy (MERIT), an evidence-based, integrative, recovery-oriented intervention to enhance insight and understanding of oneself and others in individuals with serious mental illness (SMI). MERITg may offer therapeutic interactions between participants that uniquely support recovery. The goal of the current study was to examine the relationship between MERITg participation and recovery-oriented beliefs. Thirty-one participants (outpatient = 21; inpatient = 10) in SMI treatment programs participated in MERITg as an adjunctive treatment. A short form of the Maryland Assessment of Recovery in Serious Mental Illness (MARS-12) was used to assess recovery-oriented beliefs before and after group participation. Recovery-oriented beliefs significantly improved in the outpatient MERITg group but not in the inpatient group, and change in recovery-oriented beliefs was positively correlated with the total number of groups attended. These findings suggest the promise of MERITg for enhancing recovery-oriented beliefs. The potential role of treatment setting is discussed.

BACKGROUND: Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are a critical source of care for medically underserved populations and often serve as medical homes for individuals with serious mental illness (SMI). Many FQHCs provide mental health services and could facilitate access to mental health treatment within and outside of FQHCs. This study compared mental health care utilization and acute care events for adult Medicaid enrollees with SMI who receive care at Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) vs. other settings.
METHODS: This study used the 2015-2016 Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database to examine outpatient mental health care and acute care events for 32,330 Medicaid adults, ages 18-64 and with major depressive, bipolar, or schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD), who resided in FQHC service areas and received care from FQHCs vs. other settings in 2015. Multivariable linear regressions assessed associations between receiving care at FQHCs and outpatient mental health visits, psychotropic medication fills, and acute care events in 2016.
RESULTS: There were 8,887 (27.5%) adults in the study population (N = 32,330) who had at least one FQHC visit in 2015. Those who received care at FQHCs were more likely to have outpatient mental health visits (73.3% vs. 71.2%) and psychotropic medication fills (73.2% vs. 69.0%, both p < .05), including antidepressants among those with depressive disorders and antipsychotics among those with SSD. They were more likely to have ED visits (74.0% vs. 68.7%), but less likely to be hospitalized (27.8% vs. 31.9%, both p < .05). However, there was no significant difference in the likelihood of having an acute psychiatric hospitalization (9.5% vs. 9.8%, p = .35).
CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicaid enrollees with SMIs who had access to care at FQHCs, those receiving care at FQHCs were more likely to have outpatient mental health visits and psychotropic medication fills, with lower rates of hospitalization, suggesting potentially improved quality of outpatient care. Higher ED visit rates among those receiving care at FQHCs warrant additional investigation.