A Systematic Review of Inequalities in the Mental Health Experiences of Black African, Black Caribbean and Black-mixed UK Populations: Implications for Action.

BACKGROUND: Measurable differences in the experience and treatment of mental health conditions have been found to exist between different racial categories of community groups. The objective of this research was to review the reported mental health of Black African-Caribbean communities in the UK, determinants of mental health, and interventions to enhance their experiences of mental health services. METHOD: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement was applied. To be included, papers must be published in a peer reviewed journal; report on adult populations (over 18) from any of Black African, Black Caribbean or Black mixed people in the UK; and assess (quantitative), or discuss (qualitative) mental health experiences, determinants of mental health, or interventions intended to enhance experiences of mental health services among the target population. The aims, inclusion criteria, data extraction, and data quality evaluation were specified in advance. Searches were conducted using EBSCO (PsychInfo; MEDLINE; CINAHL Plus; psychology and behavioural sciences collection). The search strategy included search terms relating to the aim. Risk of bias was assessed using a standard tool, records were organised using Endnote, and data were extracted and synthesised using Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were included, of which 26 were quantitative and six reported exclusively on Black participants. Black populations were less likely to access mental health support via traditional pathways due to stigma and mistrust of mental health services. Black Africans especially, sought alternative help from community leaders, which increased the likelihood of accessing treatment at the point of crisis or breakdown, which in turn increased risk of being detained under the Mental Health Act and via the criminal justice system. DISCUSSION: Findings suggest a cycle of poor mental health, coercive treatment, stigma, and mistrust of services as experienced by Black communities. Evidence was limited by poorly defined ethnic categories, especially where Black populations were subsumed into one category. It is recommended that mental health services work collaboratively with cultural and faith communities in supporting Black people to cope with mental illness, navigate mental health pathways, and provide culturally appropriate advice. Protocol Registration Number PROSPERO CRD42021261510.

Performance of Sri Lankan FRAX algorithm without bone mineral density and with Quantitative Ultrasound data input

Introduction: Fracture risk assessment algorithm (FRAX) is the most validated method available to predict fracture risk. Its use is restricted due to limited availability of Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA). FRAX has the option of assessing facture risk without BMD data. Objectives: To assess the ability of Sri Lankan FRAX algorithm without BMD input in evaluating fracture risk. The possibility of replacing the BMD input with Quantitative Ultrasound (QUS) data of radius in calculating fracture risk also assessed. Method: Data of clinical risk factors associated with fractures were collected from community dwelling postmenopausal women (n=339). DXA scans were performed in all subjects and QUS scans (in radius) were performed in a randomly selected sample (n=207). Ten-year risks of major osteoporotic fracture (MOFR) and hip fracture (HFR) were calculated with BMD, without BMD (FRAX-FN0) and with US T score instead of BMD (FRAX-UST). Result and conclusions: Nearly 35.7% had high risk of fractures. FRAX-FN0 had 79.2% sensitivity, 80.1% specificity, 68.8% positive predictive value (PPV) and 87.4% negative predictive value (NPV). FRAX-UST showed 78.4% sensitivity, 70% specificity, 59.8% PPV and 85% NPV. ROC AUCs were above 0.80 in both FRAX-FN0 and FRAX-UST. The standard errors of estimate (SEE) were less in FRAX-FN0 (3.96 and 2.76 for MOFR-FN0 and HFR-FN0 respectively) compared to FRAX-UST (6.13 and 4.83 for MOFR-UST and HFR-UST, respectively). In conclusion, Sri Lankan FRAX without BMD is an acceptable alternative in areas with restricted DXA facility. Radial QUS data cannot be used as a substitute to FN-BMD in Sri Lankan FRAX.