Month: January 2024

Reading of the Week: Employee Well-being & Corporate Strategies – the new Industrial Relations Paper; Also, Physician Burnout and Moyles on Suicide

From the Editor

Mindfulness programs, apps for sleep, resilience training. More and more corporations are offering these types of wellness interventions. Indeed, employee mental health services have become a billion-dollar industry. As reporter Ellen Barry recently observed in The New York Times: “These programs are a point of pride for forward-thinking human resource departments, evidence that employers care about their workers.” But are employees actually feeling better?

In a new paper for Industrial Relations Journal, William J. Fleming (of the University of Oxford) used survey data involving more than 46 000 British employees from 233 organizations, and considered several well-being efforts – including, yes, mindfulness programs, apps for sleep, and resilience training. He looked at several subjective well-being indicators. “Results suggest interventions are not providing additional or appropriate resources in response to job demands.” We look at the study and its implications.

In the second selection, Marcus V. Ortega (of Harvard University) and his co-authors look at physician burnout over time, drawing on US survey data for JAMA Network Open. With the pandemic, not unexpectedly, they found that physicians reported more burnout. “Findings of this survey study suggest that the physician burnout rate in the US is increasing.”

And in the third selection, author Trina Moyles writes about her brother and his suicide in a deeply personal essay for The Globe and Mail. She discusses her grief, the reaction of others, and her attempts at finding closure. She argues that we need to speak more openly about this topic. “Suicide: The word fires like a gunshot, so I’ve found myself whispering it.”

DG

Continue reading

Reading of the Week: Clozapine & Neutropenia – the new Lancet Psych Paper; Also, a Letter to the Editor and Bialik on Mental Health

From the Editor

Clozapine is special.

Almost seven decades after its release, that statement – from a new Lancet Psychiatry Editorial – remains true. Clozapine is the best antipsychotic for those who are treatment refractory in their schizophrenia. But there is the risk of potentially life-threatening neutropenia. And so its use is clunky, with much blood work and monitoring, off-putting to some who would benefit from this medication.

Are we too cautious with clozapine? In the first selection, Dr. Korinne Northwood (of The University of Queensland) and her co-authors consider that question in a new Lancet Psychiatry paper. Drawing from a major clozapine database for Australia and New Zealand patients, they analyzed 32 years of data involving 2.6 million blood tests and looked at neutropenic events. “Our results support greater flexibility in prescribing of clozapine and a more balanced approach to risk…” We review the paper and mull its clinical implications.

Australia: cool architecture and good clozapine data

In the second selection, in a letter to the editor, Clement Ma and Dr. Peter Szatmari (both of the University of Toronto) write about the recent MST vs. ECT paper from JAMA Psychiatry. They offer some hesitation on the authors’ wording: “a non-significant result in a superiority trial does not imply that the two treatments are equivalent.”

And in the third selection, actress and former Jeopardy! host Mayim Bialik writes personally about her mental health problems for Trend Magazine. She describes the challenges of getting help and her decision to speak out. She also notes the societal shift in thinking about mental illness. “[S]haring our own personal struggles is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign of strength. We all want to feel better, live better, and experience more joy and less suffering.”

DG

Continue reading

Reading of the Week: The Best of 2023

From the Editor

Welcome 2024.

It’s our tradition that we begin the New Year by reviewing the best of the past one.

So, this week, we consider the best papers of 2023.

Of course, the list is hardly definitive. The 10 papers selected are interesting and relevant to your clinical work. But another 10 – or 20 or 30 – could have been picked. 

These papers cover everything from AI to virtual care. The one common thread: they are all clinically relevant. 

And I name a person of the year, a remarkable advocate.

DG

Continue reading