Search

Objectives: To our best knowledge, no study in France has comprehensively investigated the prehospital history of patients admitted for severe cases of COVID-19. 'Patients' voice is an excellent means to capture data on primary care pathways. We aimed to identify clusters of COVID-19 hospitalised patients with similar prehospital symptom sequences, and to test whether these clusters were associated with a higher risk of poor clinical outcomes. Design: Cross-sectional online survey using life-event calendars. Setting: All patients hospitalised for COVID-19 between September 2020 and May 2021 in the Infectious Disease Departments in Nice and in Marseilles in France. Participants: 312 patients responded to the survey. Main outcome measures: From the day of symptom onset to the day of hospitalisation, we defined a symptom sequence as the time-ordered vector of the successive symptom grades (grade 1, grade 2, grade 3). State sequence analysis with optimal matching was used to identify clusters of patients with similar symptom sequences. Multivariate logistic regressions were performed to test whether these clusters were associated with admission to intensive care unit (ICU) and COVID-19 sequelae after hospitalisation. Results: Three clusters of symptom sequences were identified among 312 complete prehospital pathways. A specific group of patients (29%) experienced extended symptoms of severe COVID-19, persisting for an average duration of 7.5 days before hospitalisation. This group had a significantly higher probability of being admitted to ICU (adjusted OR 2.01). They were less likely to know a loved one who was a healthcare worker, and more likely to have a lower level of education. Similarly, this group of patients, who were more likely to have previously visited the emergency room without exhibiting severe symptoms at that time, may have been inclined to postpone reassessment when their health worsened. Their relatives played a decisive role in their hospitalisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Little is known about depressed patients' profiles and how they are managed. The aim of the study is to compare GPs and psychiatrists for 1°) sociodemographic and clinical profile of their patients considered as depressed 2°) patterns of care provision. Methods The study design is an observational cross-sectional study on a random sample of GPs and psychiatrists working in France. Consecutive inclusion of patients seen in consultation considered as depressed by the physician. GPs enrolled 6,104 and psychiatrists 1,433 patients. Data collected: sociodemographics, psychiatric profile, environmental risk factors of depression and treatment. All clinical data were collected by participating physicians; there was no direct independent clinical assessment of patients to check the diagnosis of depressive disorder. Results Compared to patients identified as depressed by GPs, those identified by psychiatrists were younger, more often urban (10.5% v 5.4% – OR = 2.4), educated (42.4% v 25.4% – OR = 3.9), met DSM-IV criteria for depression (94.6% v 85.6% – OR = 2.9), had been hospitalized for depression (26.1% v 15.6% – OR = 2.0) and were younger at onset of depressive problems (all adjusted p < .001). No difference was found for psychiatric and somatic comorbidity, suicide attempt and severity of current depression. Compared to GPs, psychiatrists more often prescribed tricyclics and very novel antidepressants (7.8% v 2.3% OR = 5.0 and 6.8% v 3.0% OR = 3.8) with longer duration of antidepressant treatment. GPs' patients received more "non-conventional" treatment (8.8% v 2.4% OR = 0.3) and less psychotherapy (72.2% v 89.1% OR = 3.1) (all adjusted p < .001). Conclusion Differences between patients mainly concerned educational level and area of residence with few differences regarding clinical profile. Differences between practices of GPs and psychiatrists appear to reflect more the organization of the French care system than the competence of providers.

Introduction: Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs) have problems with social skills. Social skills training groups are among the proposed therapeutic strategies, but their efficacy still needs to be evaluated. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of an implicit social skills training group in children with ASDs without intellectual disability. Methods: A before-and-after study of children with ASD without intellectual disability was conducted in a child psychiatry day hospital, where they participated in an implicit group with cooperative games. Their social skills were assessed using the Social-Emotional Profile (SEP), the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS), and the empathy quotient (EQ) before and after 22 weeks. Results: Six patients aged 9 to 10 years old were evaluated. A significant increase in overall adaptation and social skills (median 8 and 7.7 points) in the SEP was demonstrated in addition to a significant reduction in the CARS score (median: 4 points), including in the field of social relationships. The EQ increased two-fold. Discussion—Conclusion: This implicit group improved the children’s social skills. It would be interesting to evaluate the maintenance of these skills over time, examine more widespread results, and compare implicit and explicit groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]