Background: Early in 2020, mental health services had to rapidly shift from face-to-face models of care to delivering the majority of treatments remotely (by video or phone call or occasionally messaging) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This resulted in several challenges for staff and patients, but also in benefits such as convenience or increased access for people with impaired mobility or in rural areas. There is a need to understand the extent and impacts of telemental health implementation, and barriers and facilitators to its effective and acceptable use. This is relevant both to future emergency adoption of telemental health and to debates on its future use in routine mental health care. Objective: To investigate the adoption and impacts of telemental health approaches during the COVID-19 pandemic, and facilitators and barriers to optimal implementation. Methods: Four databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science) were searched for primary research relating to remote working, mental health care, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Preprint servers were also searched. Results of studies were synthesized using framework synthesis. Results: A total of 77 papers met our inclusion criteria. In most studies, the majority of contacts could be transferred to a remote form during the pandemic, and good acceptability to service users and clinicians tended to be reported, at least where the alternative to remote contacts was interrupting care. However, a range of impediments to dealing optimal care by this means were also identified. Conclusions: Implementation of telemental health allowed some continuing support to the majority of service users during the COVID-19 pandemic and has value in an emergency situation. However, not all service users can be reached by this means, and better evidence is now needed on long-term impacts on therapeutic relationships and quality of care, and on impacts on groups at risk of digital exclusion and how to mitigate these. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews CRD42021211025; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021211025

When young people reach the upper age limit of child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS), care should be transferred to an adult mental health service (AMHS) if they require ongoing support. However, many young people experience a significant disruption of their care during this transition, whilst others may fail to transition at all. Currently, there is no systematic appraisal of the international evidence regarding the outcomes of young people after transition. A systematic review was conducted which aimed to synthesise and review the existing research regarding outcomes after transition. We searched six databases from their inception until December 2017 for research relating to either the mental health or service use outcomes of young people after reaching their CAMHS age boundary. Results were synthesised narratively. The initial searches identified 18,287 papers, of which 213 were screened on full text. 13 papers were included in the review, representing 10 cohorts of young people who crossed the transition age boundary. No studies contained extractable data on mental health outcomes following transition, and therefore, this review focused only on service use outcomes. Results showed a quarter of young people transitioned to AMHS, with the other young people experiencing varied outcomes after leaving CAMHS and multiple transitions during this time. This review provides evidence for the varying service use outcomes of young people after reaching the upper age limit of CAMHS. However, longitudinal research into long-term outcomes is lacking, in addition to research regarding the mental health and functioning outcomes of young people following transition.Protocol registration The protocol for this systematic review has been registered with PROSPERO, ID number CRD42018085916.

Background: Telemental health (delivering mental health care via video calls, telephone calls, or SMS text messages) is becoming increasingly widespread. Telemental health appears to be useful and effective in providing care to some service users in some settings, especially during an emergency restricting face-to-face contact, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, important limitations have been reported, and telemental health implementation risks the reinforcement of pre-existing inequalities in service provision. If it is to be widely incorporated into routine care, a clear understanding is needed of when and for whom it is an acceptable and effective approach and when face-to-face care is needed. Objective: This rapid realist review aims to develop a theory about which telemental health approaches work (or do not work), for whom, in which contexts, and through what mechanisms. Methods: Rapid realist reviewing involves synthesizing relevant evidence and stakeholder expertise to allow timely development of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in areas where evidence is urgently needed to inform policy and practice. The CMO configurations encapsulate theories about what works for whom and by what mechanisms. Sources included eligible papers from 2 previous systematic reviews conducted by our team on telemental health; an updated search using the strategy from these reviews; a call for relevant evidence, including “gray literature,” to the public and key experts; and website searches of relevant voluntary and statutory organizations. CMO configurations formulated from these sources were iteratively refined, including through discussions with an expert reference group, including researchers with relevant lived experience and frontline clinicians, and consultation with experts focused on three priority groups: children and young people, users of inpatient and crisis care services, and digitally excluded groups. Results: A total of 108 scientific and gray literature sources were included. From our initial CMO configurations, we derived 30 overarching CMO configurations within four domains: connecting effectively; flexibility and personalization; safety, privacy, and confidentiality; and therapeutic quality and relationship. Reports and stakeholder input emphasized the importance of personal choice, privacy and safety, and therapeutic relationships in telemental health care. The review also identified particular service users likely to be disadvantaged by telemental health implementation and a need to ensure that face-to-face care of equivalent timeliness remains available. Mechanisms underlying the successful and unsuccessful application of telemental health are discussed. Conclusions: Service user choice, privacy and safety, the ability to connect effectively, and fostering strong therapeutic relationships need to be prioritized in delivering telemental health care. Guidelines and strategies coproduced with service users and frontline staff are needed to optimize telemental health implementation in real-world settings. Trial Registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); CRD42021260910; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021260910

The paediatric-adult split in mental health care necessitates young people to make a transition between services when they reach the upper end of child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). However, we know that this transition is often poor, and not all young people who require ongoing support are able to continue care in adult mental health services (AMHS). These young people are said to have fallen through the gap between services. This research aimed to explore the reasons why young people fall through the gap between CAMHS and AMHS, and what effect this has had on them and their families. Narrative interviews were conducted with 15 young people and 15 parents, representing 19 unique transition stories. Themes were identified collaboratively using thematic analysis. Reasons for falling through the gap were grouped into systemic problems and problems with the quality of care received. Effects of falling through the gap were grouped into separate themes for young people (feeling abandoned; struggling to manage without continued care; problems with medication) and parents (emotional impact of care ending; parents taking an active role in the young person’s care). To our knowledge, this is the first qualitative study that has focused only on the experiences of young people who have fallen through the gap between services. This research adds novel findings to existing literature regarding barriers to transition and the effects of discontinuity of care.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a rapid shift from traditional face-to-face care provision towards delivering mental health care remotely through telecommunications, often referred to as telemental health care. However, the manner and extent of telemental health implementation have varied considerably across settings and areas, and substantial barriers are encountered. There is, therefore, a need to identify what works best for service users and staff and establish the key mechanisms for efficient integration into routine care. Objective: We aimed to identify investigations of pre-planned strategies reported in the literature intended to achieve or improve effective and sustained implementation of telemental health approaches (including video calls, telephone calls, text messaging platforms or a combination of any of these approaches with face-to-face care), and to evaluate how different strategies influence implementation outcomes. Methods: A systematic review was conducted, with five databases searched for any relevant literature published between January 2010 and July 2021. Studies were eligible if they took place in specialist mental health services and focused on pre-planned strategies to achieve or improve the delivery of mental health care through remote communication between mental health professionals or between mental health professionals and service users, family members, unpaid carers, or peer supporters. All included studies were quality-assessed. Data were synthesised using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation of implementation strategies and the taxonomy of implementation outcomes. Results: A total of 14 studies were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria from a total of 14,294 records of which 338 were assessed at full text. All ERIC implementation strategies were used by at least one study, the most commonly reported being ‘Train and educate stakeholders’. All studies reported using a combination of several implementation strategies, with the mean number of strategies used per study of 3.5 (range 2–6), many of which were reported to result in an improvement in implementation over time. Few studies specifically investigated a single implementation strategy and its associated outcomes, making conclusions regarding the most beneficial strategy difficult to draw. Conclusions: Using a combination of implementation strategies appears to be a helpful method of supporting the implementation of telemental health. Further research is needed to test the impact of specific implementation strategies on implementation outcomes.

Background: Owing to poor continuity of care between child and adult mental health services, young people are often discharged to their GP when they reach the upper boundary of child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). This handover is poorly managed, and GPs can struggle to support young people without input from specialist services. Little is known about young people’s experiences of accessing mental health support from their GP after leaving CAMHS.Aim: To explore the experiences and perspectives of young people and the parents/carers of young people receiving primary care support after CAMHS and to identify barriers and facilitators to accessing primary care.Design and setting: Qualitative study with young people and parents in two English counties: London and West Midlands.Method: Narrative interviews were conducted with 14 young people and 13 parents who had experienced poor continuity of care after reaching CAMHS transition boundary. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.Results: Three themes were identified: unmet mental health needs, disjointed care, and taking responsibility for the young person’s mental health care. Barriers included the perception that GPs couldn’t prescribe certain medication, anxiety caused by the general practice environment, and having to move to a new practice at university. Young people’s positive experiences were more likely to include having a long-term relationship with their GP and finding that their GP made time to understand their needs and experiences.Conclusion: GPs could help to meet the unmet needs of young people unable to access specialist mental health services after leaving CAMHS. There is a need for comprehensive handover of care from CAMHS to GPs, which could include a joint meeting with the young person and a member of the CAMHS team. Future research should focus on interventions which improve continuity of care for young people after leaving CAMHS, and collaborative working across community mental health services.