We conducted a pilot study to determine patients' views on receiving a copy of the assessment letter sent to their general practitioner and to determine how psychiatrists' letter writing practice would be altered in the knowledge that patients would receive copies of such letters. Seventy-six consecutive new outpatients received copies of the initial assessment letter sent to general practitioners. Patients were asked to complete a short questionnaire on how the practice affected them. For each letter, psychiatrists were asked to provide details of anything of importance that had been omitted from the letter that in their normal practice they would have included.

There was a broad range of responses on how patients felt about the letters. Only two patients found the letters unhelpful, and 83% expressed a positive desire to continue receiving letters, even though initially 18% found the letter distressing. For 56 out of 76 patients, psychiatrists stated that they composed and sent out the letter to the GP in accordance with their usual practice and copied the letter to the patient in an unaltered form. For 17 patients, the psychiatrist stated that some information he/she would usually have included in the GP letter was omitted in the copy the patient received. In a further 3 cases, the psychiatrist sent no letter to the patient.

Patients found it helpful to receive copies of their assessment letters. Psychiatrists might require training and reassurance about this policy before implementation.

By use of a postal survey we sought to determine attitudes and beliefs about recruitment to psychiatry. Members of the Scottish Division of the Royal College of Psychiatrists were asked to complete a questionnaire asking their views on the importance of various factors in relation to recruitment (n=387).

Response rates were low from non-consultants and we focused on the views of the 212 consultants (55%) who responded. The perceived low status of psychiatry among other doctors and the belief that individuals with psychiatric disorders are difficult to deal with emerged as the two most important factors seen to affect recruitment. Improving undergraduate teaching in psychiatry was deemed important in enhancing recruitment.

Dealing with stigma, within and out with the profession, and improving undergraduate exposure to psychiatry may be important in recruiting doctors to psychiatry.

To review the literature to examine the factors that may be affecting recruitment into psychiatry in the UK. We systematically searched four databases to identify studies from 1974 to 2016 and identified 27 papers that met the specified inclusion criteria.

Most papers (n = 24) were based on questionnaire surveys. The population in all studies comprised of 1879 psychiatrists, 6733 students and 220746 trainees. About 4–7% of students opt for a career in psychiatry. Enrichment activities helped to attract students more towards psychiatry than just total time spent in the specialty. Job content in terms of the lack of scientific basis, poor prognosis and stigma towards psychiatry, work-related stress and problems with training jobs were common barriers highlighted among students and trainees, affecting recruitment. Job satisfaction and family-friendly status of psychiatry was rated highly by students, with lifestyle factors appearing to be important for trainees who tend to choose psychiatry.

Negative attitudes and stigma towards psychiatry continue to persist. Teaching and training in psychiatry needs rethinking to improve student experience and recruitment into the specialty.

There have been a variety of instruments developed for evaluating family functioning, but no specific measure has emerged as appropriate for routine clinical use. The Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale (FACES) was viewed as a useful tool for a period, but has been less popular of late. This paper looks at its use in families with two very different types of problem to assess its discriminatory ability.

Mothers with depression whose children were not showing mental health difficulties reported a very different pattern of family functioning from those whose children were showing chronic school refusal.

The FACES is capable of discriminating between different patterns of family functioning. Its ease of administration, and the information it provides, should recommend it for wider use in clinical settings.

A 1-day census provided an opportunity to examine the variation between 44 mental health services in the frequency of prescribing high doses and polypharmacy of antipsychotic drugs to in-patients on acute psychiatric wards.

The proportion of patients prescribed a high dose ranged 0–50% and simultaneous use of more than one antipsychotic drug ranged 12–71%. A number of case-mix variables explained 26% and 40%, respectively, of the variance between services on these two indicators of prescribing practice.

Services with high rates of prescription of high dose or polypharmacy might consider a review of clinical practice and of service-level factors that might affect prescribing.

To determine knowledge, skills and confidence of junior medical emergency department staff in managing mental health patients. Over a 2-year period new emergency department junior doctors were given a questionnaire to complete early on in their post and prior to any mental health training. The questionnaire asked about knowledge, confidence, concerns and skills in the management of mental health patients in accident and emergency services.

More than half of the 32 doctors surveyed said they lacked knowledge, skills and confidence when assessing mental health patients.

The survey has demonstrated a need for mental health training of new doctors working in the emergency department. Effective training for such doctors can be offered by a liaison psychiatry service. This should be embedded in their teaching programme and be continually responsive to their perceived training needs.

The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) and its older adults’ version (HoNOS 65+) have been used widely for 20 years, but their glossaries have not been revised to reflect clinicians' experiences or changes in service delivery. The Royal College of Psychiatrists convened an international advisory board, with UK, Australian and New Zealand expertise, to identify desirable amendments. The aim was to improve rater experience by removing ambiguity and inconsistency in the glossary rather than more radical revision.

Changes proposed to the HoNOS are reported. HoNOS 65+ changes will be reported separately. Based on the views and experience of the countries involved, a series of amendments were identified.

While effective clinician training remains critically important, these revisions aim to improve intra- and interrater reliability and improve validity. Next steps will depend on feedback from HoNOS users. Reliability and validity testing will depend on funding.

None.

To examine non-attendance rates in patients seen by psychiatrists of different grades and a consultant clinical psychologist. Rates were obtained from the patient administration system over a 21-month period.

A planned linear contrast showed that the clinical psychologist's patients had the lowest rate of non-attendance (7.8%), followed in turn by those of consultant psychiatrists (18.6%), specialist registrars (34%) and senior house officers (37.5%).

Factors such as continuity of care, perceived clinical competence and the provision of non-medical interventions might have an impact on attendance rates. These results indicate the difficulty in reconciling the training needs of junior doctors with the provision of continuity and quality of care for patients. Reminder systems for people seeing training doctors might be an effective way of reducing non-attendance rates.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists' Consensus Statement on “The use of high-dose antipsychotic medication’ suggests only fully qualified psychiatrists (MRCPsych) should recommend the prescribing of high-dose antipsychotic treatment. We observed changes in anti-psychotic prescribing in two surveys of psychiatric in-patients conducted eight and 32 months after publication of the Consensus Statement.

Overall mean chlorpromazine equivalent doses of antipsychotic drugs reduced between the surveys. When p.r.n. (as required) prescribing (usually done by junior doctors) is included, mean potential doses and numbers of patients who might receive ‘high-doses' increases substantially, although the reduction between surveys in total mean dose and proportion of patients on high-dose antipsychotic medication is preserved, and the actual use of p.r.n. medication was low (4–5% of p.r.n. prescriptions).

We recommend the development of local guidelines for junior staff concerning antipsychotic drug prescribing, regular monitoring of p.r.n. medication by consultants, and pharmacists' involvement in reviews of patients prescribed high-dose antipsychotic medication.