Background People with mental health problems are at particular risk both for infection with COVID-19 and for more severe course of illness. Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is crucial in promoting vaccine acceptance among people with mental health diagnoses. This review aims to identify the prevalence and discuss factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the mentally ill population. Main body We conducted a detailed literature search and included 15 articles for discussion in this review. Several studies showed varying trends of vaccine hesitancy rates among different countries. Major factors involved in vaccine hesitancy in general include mistrust, misinformation, believing in conspiracy theories, and negative attitudes towards vaccines. It was surprising that none of the studies were focused on vaccine acceptance rates and factors associated with vaccine hesitancy among the mentally ill population. However, studies do show that COVID-19 is associated with worse healthcare outcomes for psychiatric patients, and vaccine hesitancy correlated with a lower likelihood of receiving mental health treatment and vaccinations. Psychiatrists need to address issues among patients who are particularly vulnerable to the fear of vaccines which include anxiety, panic attacks, certain phobias including trypanophobia and agoraphobia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and certain types of traumas. Psychiatrists need to communicate effectively, show respect, empathy, and deliver accurate and honest information about the vaccines. Motivational interviewing, getting people with mental health illness to organize vaccine campaigns, and involving families with mental health problems may promote vaccine acceptance among this group. Conclusion Existing literature on the rates of vaccine hesitancy among people with mental health illness is limited. The mental health illness may increase the risk of hesitancy especially in patients having certain emotional disorders such as anxiety and phobia. More studies addressing vaccine hesitancy rates and factors associated with the mentally ill population need to be done in the future.

Background A systematic and meta-analysis was conducted to examine the evidence of the effects of botulinum toxin A on chronic tension-type headache. Methods Cochrane, Embase, Ovid, ProQuest, PubMed, Scopus, Web-of-Science databases, and ClinicallTrials.gov registry were systematically searched for studies examining the effects of botulinum toxin A on tension-type headaches. The records were screened by two independent reviewers using pre-determined eligibility criteria. DerSimonian Liard random-effects meta-analyses were performed using the ‘meta’ package (5.2-0) in R (4.2.0). Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s Tool RoB 2 and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Clinical significance was determined using pre-defined minimal clinically important differences. Results Eleven controlled trials were included (390 botulinum toxin A, 297 controls). Botulinum toxin A was associated with significant improvements in standardized headache intensity (−0.502 standard deviations [−0.945, −0.058]), headache frequency (−2.830 days/month [−4.082, −1.578]), daily headache duration (−0.965 [−1.860, −0.069]) and the frequency of acute pain medication use (−2.200 days/month [−3.485, −0.915]) vs controls. Botulinum toxin A-associated improvements exceeded minimal clinically important differences for headache intensity, frequency, and acute pain medication use. A 79% (28%, 150%) greater response rate was observed for botulinum toxin A vs controls in improving chronic tension-type headache. Treatment of eight chronic tension-type headache patients was sufficient to elicit a therapeutic response in one patient. Conclusions Corroborating the current mechanistic evidence, our meta-analysis supports the utility of botulinum toxin A for managing chronic tension-type headaches. However, due to limitations in the quality of evidence, adequately-powered high-quality controlled trials examining the effects of Botulinum toxin A on chronic tension-type headache are warranted. Registration Protocol preregistered in PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020178616)

Clonidine is an alpha-2 agonist traditionally used as an antihypertensive, and more recently in the treatment of psychiatric disorders such as attention-deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD), tic disorders such as Tourette’s syndrome, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, there are scarce data in the literature about the use of clonidine in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). In this report, we present the case of a 16-year-old female suffering from OCD. The first-line treatment with sertraline was not very efficacious in improving her symptoms and even led to worsening of the same. However, subsequent treatment with clonidine resulted in rapid and significant improvement in her condition. We postulate that further research is required to gain more insight into the therapeutic potential of clonidine in OCD patients.