Background A high proportion of adults with intellectual disabilities are prescribed off-licence antipsychotics in the absence of a psychiatric illness. The National Health Service in England launched an initiative in 2016, ‘Stopping over-medication of people with a learning disability [intellectual disability], autism or both’ (STOMP), to address this major public health concern. Aims To gain understanding from UK psychiatrists working with adults with intellectual disabilities on the successes and challenges of withdrawing antipsychotics for challenging behaviours. Method An online questionnaire was sent to all UK psychiatrists working in the field of intellectual disability (estimated 225). Results Half of the 88 respondents stated that they started withdrawing antipsychotics over 5 years ago and 52.3% stated that they are less likely to initiate an antipsychotic since the launch of STOMP. However, since then, 46.6% are prescribing other classes of psychotropic medication instead of antipsychotics for challenging behaviours, most frequently the antidepressants. Complete antipsychotic discontinuation in over 50% of patients treated with antipsychotics was achieved by only 4.5% of respondents (n = 4); 11.4% reported deterioration in challenging behaviours in over 50% of patients on withdrawal and the same proportion (11.4%) reported no deterioration. Only 32% of respondents made the diagnosis of psychiatric illness in all their patients themselves. Family and paid carers’ concern, lack of multi-agency and multidisciplinary input and unavailability of non-medical psychosocial intervention are key reported factors hampering the withdrawal attempt. Conclusions There is an urgent need to develop national guidelines to provide a framework for systematic psychotropic drug reviews and withdrawal where possible.

The factors determining disease course and survival in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (fHP) have not been fully elucidated.The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of patients with fHP in a real-world cohort and investigate factors associated with worse outcomes. We aimed to explore the use of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and peripheral blood monocyte levels in predicting mortality.MethodsA retrospective, multicentre, observational UK cohort study.ResultsPatients with fHP were significantly younger than those with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (median age fHP 73 vs IPF 75 years) and were much more likely to be woman (fHP 61% vs IPF 26%). In almost half of all fHP cases (49%, n=104/211), no causative antigen was identified from either the history or specific antigen testing. Overall, fHP was associated with a better survival than IPF, although median survival of both groups was poor (fHP 62 months vs IPF 52 months).IPF survival in patients with a high NLR was significantly lower than those with a low NLR (44 vs 83 months). A monocyte count ≥0.95 K/uL also predicted significantly poorer outcomes for patients with IPF compared with <0.95 K/uL (33 vs 57 months). In contrast, NLR and monocyte count did not predict survival in the fHP cohort.ConclusionsAlthough fHP has a statistically lower mortality than IPF, absolute survival time of both conditions is poor. High baseline NLR and absolute monocyte counts predict worse survival in IPF but not in fHP, highlighting the potential for divergence in their pathogenic mechanisms.

No abstract

Accessible summary ·There is significant concern about medication being given to people with intellectual disability (ID) inappropriately particularly to manage their behaviours which needs to stop. ·This needs people who work and support people with ID with their distress to be aware of the national concerns and guidance. ·We checked whether NHS staff who work with people with ID , that is the ID service, are aware of the latest guidance and whether training them will help improve their knowledge. ·We found that there were differences in knowledge in some groups such as nurses and psychologists compared to others and training can make a positive change. This is important as training can possibly deliver better care to people with ID . Abstract BackgroundIntellectual disability (ID) is associated with polypharmacy particularly off‐label psychotropics for “challenging behaviour.” NHS England introduced the “stopping over medication of people with a learning disability (LD), autism or both” (STOMP) initiative. As ID services are a professionally diverse group, it is important to know whether teams have suitable knowledge to deliver STOMP. The impact of delivering bespoke STOMP training was evaluated. MethodsA 21‐item multiple‐choice questionnaire was distributed to three specialist ID teams in the south‐west of England. Current best practice and national guidance knowledge on psychotropic medication use in ID were assessed. One team received bespoke training covering the content of the questionnaire prior to completion. ResultsSurvey participation was 44% (21/48) by the trained team, 34% (15/44) and 70% (7/10) in the untrained teams. The trained team participants scored over 80% on 19/21 questions compared to 15/21 and 16/21 in the untrained teams. Subspeciality analysis of pooled data (n = 43) showed nursing scored more than 80% on 16/21 questions, psychology 15/21 and allied health professionals (AHPs) 19/21. Nursing and psychology both reported STOMP to be a priority. Majority responded “yes” to potentially being involved in STOMP. ConclusionsBetter STOMP knowledge and understanding of best practice and guidelines are associated with training. Nursing and psychology are essential to STOMP delivery but scored lower than AHPs. We recommend semi‐structured STOMP training developed locally with national underpinnings for all specialist ID teams, particularly focussed on front‐line staff directly involved in the management of challenging behaviour.