Search

Abstract Background Schizophrenia is a complex neuropsychiatric disorder with various etiologic factors. Aberrant levels of neurotransmitters or growth factors such as dopamine, serotonin, and BDNF have been shown to cause cognitive impairment in schizophrenia. Recently, the gut microbiome has also been suggested as a factor in the development of the disorder. To explore this potential link, we conducted a pilot study to examine the relationship between the gut microbiome and plasma levels of neurotransmitters and growth factors in schizophrenia. Shotgun metagenome sequencing of total RNA from fecal samples were used to profile the gut microbiome of schizophrenia patients (SCZ) and healthy controls (HC). The MetaPhlAn2 and HUMaN2 pipelines were used for bioinformatic analyses. ELISA was used to measure the plasma levels of dopamine, serotonin, and BDNF. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used for correlation analysis. Results We found that butyrate-producing bacteria were enriched in HC, whereas succinate-producing bacteria, namely Phascolarctobacterium succinatutens and Paraprevotella clara, were enriched in SCZ. The gut microbiota of SCZ was enriched in lipid biosynthesis pathways related to bile-resistant bacteria, whereas phospholipid pathways linked with butyrate-producing bacteria were enriched in HC. Alistipes indistinctus, Dorea longicatena, and Roseburia inulinivorans were negatively correlated with dopamine levels. Roseburia intestinalis and Parabacteroides goldsteini were negatively correlated with serotonin and BDNF levels, respectively. We found a significant correlation between dopamine and serotonin levels, and the super-pathway of purine deoxyribonucleoside degradation. Conclusions This study provides further support that gut microbiota could modulate neurotransmitter levels. The results suggest that gut microbiome-targeted therapies may help to rebalance neurotransmitter levels, offering new hope for the treatment of schizophrenia.

Aims The skill of critical appraisal is mandatory for evidence-based psychiatric practice although the process of learning can be tough for busy psychiatrist trainees. Ironically, reading alone does not translate into skill acquisition. The accessibility to conventional journal clubs may also be limited for doctors working in busy non-academic training centres. Therefore, attending an intensive workshop on critical appraisal skills can be a viable solution. This study elucidated the experience of using an innovative approach, i.e. Multiple Mini Journal Clubs (MMJC), to improve Malaysian trainee psychiatrists’ critical appraisal skills. Methods A one-day workshop was conducted for 19 participants who were preparing for MRCPsych Paper B, using the combination of 1) a pre-recorded video lecture with a two-hour question and answer session; 2) three 45-minute stations in a group of three persons to practice critical appraisal of a cross-sectional, a validation, and a randomised controlled study. A standardised approach, i.e. Critical Appraisal in Five Expressed Steps (CAFES), was used by facilitators. CAFES involved asking and answering the following big heading questions while incorporating other standard critical appraisal techniques under each of the headings: 1) What is the research question; 2) Can the research methodology answer the question; 3) Does the result make sense; 4) Are the findings translatable to my setting; 5) How to improve the study if I were to conduct a similar study. Three formative assessments were carried out using Single Best Answer and Extended Matching Items. Qualitative feedback and informed consent were collected. Results Hundred per cent of participants agreed that their objective of attending the workshop had been achieved through the MMJC, i.e. learned both the theory and skill of critical appraisal which allowed immediate translation into practice during the MMJC. Nevertheless, there was no statistical difference in participants’ achievement for pre-, mid- and post-workshop formative assessments, i.e. median of 7/25, 7/28, and 8/27 respectively. Positive responses toward MMJC included less performance anxiety in a small group, active interaction, individualised feedback, and fun. The challenges faced included the need for strict time management and a big group of facilitators. Suggestions for improvement included the extension of the workshop duration and breaking up the lecture into several sessions. Conclusion Further improvement and re-evaluation of the effectiveness of MMJC is required to optimise learning outcomes.

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has become the greatest challenge of the new millennium. Most healthcare workers (HCWs) experienced unprecedented levels of workload since the pandemic. This study aims to identify the prevalence and factors of depression, anxiety and stress among HCWs in Malaysian healthcare facilities in the midst of the pandemic due to the SARs-CoV-2.MethodsAn emergency response programme on mental health was conducted from June to September 2020. A standardized data collection form was distributed among the HCWs in the government hospital in Klang Valley. The form contained basic demographic information and the self-reported Malay version of the Depression, Anxiety and Stress scale (BM DASS-21).ResultsOf the1,300 staff who attended the Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Covid-19 (MHPSS COVID-19) programme, 996 staff (21.6% male, 78.4% female) completed the online survey (response rate: 76.6%). Result showed that staff aged above 40 years old were almost two times more likely to have anxiety (AOR = 1.632; 95% CI = 1.141-2.334, p:0.007) and depression (AOR = 1.637; 95% CI = 1.1.06-2.423, p:0.014) as compared to staff who were less than 40 years old. Those who had direct involvement with COVID-19 patients were likely to suffer stress (AOR = 0.596; 95% CI = 0.418-0.849, p:0.004), anxiety (AOR = 0.706; 95% Ci = 0.503-0.990, p:0.044) and depression (AOR = 0.630; 95% Ci = 0.427-0.928, p:0.019). HCWs with stress (AOR = 0.638; 95% CI of 0.476-0.856, p = 0.003), anxiety (AOR = 0.720; 95% CI 0.542-0.958, p = 0.024) and depression (AOR = 0.657; 95% CI 0.480-0.901, p = 0.009) showed less confidence to treat critically ill patients and need psychological help during outbreak.ConclusionThis study showed the importance of psychosocial support to reduce psychological distress among HCWs when working or coping during the COVID-19 pandemic or outbreak.