Synthetic cannabinoid use in an acute psychiatric inpatient unit.

In the present study, we explored the prevalence of new psychoactive substance use by people admitted into an Australian acute public mental health facility specializing in comorbid mental health and substance use. These substances have since been banned from retail outlets, but the pattern of uptake and reasons people use them is informative in terms of motivations and the management of substance use more generally. A cross-sectional study to explore the use of synthetic cannabis by people admitted to an acute adult mental health unit was undertaken. Associations with diagnostic, service use, and demographic profiles were explored. Fifty-six percent of people reported having used at least one type of new psychoactive substance, including 53.5% who reported using synthetic cannabis alone, and 18.8% who reported using both synthetic cannabis and other new psychoactive substances. Synthetic cannabis use was not associated with any demographic or diagnostic groups. Legality and availability (43% combined) were common reasons for use, along with the feeling of intoxication (20%). The high prevalence of new psychoactive substance use adds weight to the recommendation that clinicians should routinely screen for substances from the time of admission. Accurate information about these substances is required in order to provide accurate guidance and appropriate interventions to people in their care.

Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guideline for the management of deliberate self-harm.

OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance for the organisation and delivery of clinical services and the clinical management of patients who deliberately self-harm, based on scientific evidence supplemented by expert clinical consensus and expressed as recommendations. METHOD: Articles and information were sourced from search engines including PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO for several systematic reviews, which were supplemented by literature known to the deliberate self-harm working group, and from published systematic reviews and guidelines for deliberate self-harm. Information was reviewed by members of the deliberate self-harm working group, and findings were then formulated into consensus-based recommendations and clinical guidance. The guidelines were subjected to successive consultation and external review involving expert and clinical advisors, the public, key stakeholders, professional bodies and specialist groups with interest and expertise in deliberate self-harm. RESULTS: The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for deliberate self-harm provide up-to-date guidance and advice regarding the management of deliberate self-harm patients, which is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The clinical practice guidelines for deliberate self-harm is intended for clinical use and service development by psychiatrists, psychologists, physicians and others with an interest in mental health care. CONCLUSION: The clinical practice guidelines for deliberate self-harm address self-harm within specific population sub-groups and provide up-to-date recommendations and guidance within an evidence-based framework, supplemented by expert clinical consensus.