The New York Times (2/20, Saint Louis) “Well” blog reports, “Victims of bullying at school, and bullies themselves, are more likely to experience psychiatric problems in childhood, studies have shown. Now,” according to a study published online Feb. 20 in JAMA Psychiatry, “researchers have found that elevated risk of psychiatric trouble extends into adulthood, sometimes even a decade after the intimidation has ended.”

The Huffington Post (2/20, Pappas) carries a LiveScience piece, which reports that researchers “used data from a study begun 20 years ago, which queried 1,420 children and their parents about general mental health beginning at age 9, 11 or 13.” The youngsters “were assessed annually until age 16, and then they came back for follow-ups at ages 19, 21 and 25. Before age 16, participants were asked whether they had been bullied or bullied others, how frequently, and where any bullying occurred, among other questions.”

HealthDay (2/21, Reinberg) reports that the investigators “found that both those who had been bullied as kids and those who had been both bullies and bullied had a higher risk for psychological problems than those who weren’t bullied. Those problems included depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, generalized anxiety, panic disorder and agoraphobia.” What’s more, “those who were both bullies and victims of bullying had, in addition to being at risk for anxiety and depression, the highest levels of suicidal thoughts.”

Medscape (2/21, Cassels) reports that “bullies were at risk for antisocial personality disorder only (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.1 – 15.8; P < .04)." MedPage Today (2/21, Phend) points out that "the study was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute on Drug Abuse," among others. Also covering the story is the Daily Mail (UK) (2/21). Related Links:

— “Childhood Bullying Can Leave Lifelong Scars, “Steven Reinberg, HealthDay, February 20, 2013.

Several national outlets reported that HHS released final rules on Wednesday for the ACA’s essential health benefits provision. Most note that the regulations, while integral to the law, have changed little since first proposed last November.

The New York Times (2/21, A16, Pear, Subscription Publication) reports, “The Obama administration issued a final rule on Wednesday defining ‘essential health benefits’ that must be offered by most health insurance plans next year, and it said that 32 million people would gain access to coverage of mental health care as a result.” The rule “requires insurers to cover treatment of mental illnesses, behavioral disorders, drug addiction and alcohol abuse, and other conditions.” HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius “said that in addition to the millions who would gain access to mental health care, 30 million people who already have some mental health coverage will see improvements in benefits.”

USA Today (2/21, Kennedy) reports, “The Department of Health and Human Services released its long-awaited final rule on essential health benefits today, allowing insurers and states to move forward on both the federal and state health exchanges.” In a report accompanying the report, HHS wrote, “Americans accessing coverage through non-grandfathered plans in the individual and small group markets will now be able to count on mental health and substance use disorder coverage that is comparable to their general medical and surgical coverage.”

The Wall Street Journal (2/21, A2, Dooren, Subscription Publication) reports that the Obama Administration finalized rules Wednesday which mandate that health insurance plans cover mental-health and substance-abuse treatments, among other categories, starting next year under the Affordable Care Act. The rules fall under the provision of the ACA which requires essential health benefits in 10 categories of care, like prescription medications and physical rehabilitation. Specifics requirements for insurers will be set by the states.

Reuters (2/21, Morgan) reports that in the rule, HHS said, “The states continue to maintain their traditional role in defining the scope of insurance benefits and may exercise that authority by selecting a plan that reflects the benefit priorities of that state.”

The Hill (2/21, Goad) “Regwatch” blog reports that following the rule release, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement, “People all across the country will soon find it easier to compare and enroll in health plans with better coverage, greater quality and new benefits.”

The Washington Post (2/21, Kliff) “Wonkblog” notes that “the final regulation looks similar to a draft published in November. It still allows states to pick between a handful of benchmark plans, so long as they cover a core set of physical and mental health benefits.”

The NPR (2/21, Appleby) “Shots” blog reports further, “Essential benefit requirements apply mainly to individual and small group plans. The requirements also apply to benefits provided to those newly eligible for Medicaid coverage.”

Modern Healthcare (2/21, Zigmond, Subscription Publication) reports, “The final rule maps out standards for the core set of benefits that health insurance issuers must cover in the individual and small group markets-both inside and outside of the health insurance exchanges-for 2014 and 2015.” And, NBC News (2/21, Fox) reports, “The final rules harden up draft rules published last November, after taking into account thousands of comments.” The New York Business Journal (2/21, Hoover) and MedPage Today (2/21, Pittman) also cover the story.

Related Links:

— “New Federal Rule Requires Insurers to Offer Mental Health Coverage,”Robert Pear, The new York Times, February 20, 2013.

The Baltimore Sun (2/19, Rector) reports, “A small but growing number of hospitals in Maryland have joined together to track and share information about the availability of psychiatric beds at participating institutions. The online registry is aimed at speeding patients out of overcrowded emergency rooms and into facilities where they can get the help they need.” The Sun adds, “The new tool, which went online in November, follows years of frustration among health [professionals] and patients with a system they say is woefully inadequate.”

Related Links:

— “Hospitals team to find beds for psychiatric patients, “Kevin Rector, The Baltimore Sun, February 18, 2013.

USA Today (2/18, Healy) reported, “In one of the largest studies yet to examine how modifying television content affects the development of young children ages 3 to 5, researchers report that six months after families reduced their kids’ exposure to aggressive and violence-filled programming and increased exposure to enriching and educational programming – even without changing the number of viewing hours – kids demonstrated statistically significant improved behavior compared to children whose media diet went unchanged.” These “improvements – declines in aggression and being difficult and increases in healthy social behaviors such as empathy, helpfulness and concern for others – persisted at 12 months, says the study involving 565 families in…Pediatrics.”

The New York Times (2/18, A10, Louis, Subscription Publication) reported, “Low-income boys showed the most improvement, though the researchers could not say why. Total viewing time did not differ between the two groups.”

The Los Angeles Times (2/18, Morin) “Booster Shots” blog reports that, according to the researchers, “Although television is frequently implicated as a cause of many problems in children, our research indicates that it may also be part of the solution.”

The AP (2/19, Blankinship) reports that while “the results were modest and faded over time,” they “may hold promise for finding ways to help young children avoid aggressive, violent behavior, the study authors and other doctors said.”

The CNN (2/18) “The Chart” blog points out that currently, “the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that preschoolers and older children get only one to two hours of TV or screen time a day. But in reality, they’re really watching much more.”

The ABC News (2/18) “Medical Unit” blog reports on that study, as well as a separate study published in Pediatrics that found “young adults who spent more time in front of a TV during their childhood are significantly more likely to be arrested and exhibit aggressive behavior.” Investigators “followed more than 1,000 young people in New Zealand from birth to age 26 and monitored the amount of television they watched during the ages of 5 and 15.” The researchers found that “the more television children watched, the more likely they were to have a criminal conviction, a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder and more aggressive personality traits.”

HealthDay (2/19, Dotinga) reports that while “the study doesn’t definitively prove that watching TV caused criminal activity or aggression…the researchers found that other factors (including poverty levels and IQ) didn’t play a role.” Also covering the first study wereTime (2/19, Rochman) “Family Matters” blog, Reuters (2/19, Pittman) and the CBS News (2/19, Jaslow) website.

Related Links:

— “Modifying kids’ TV habits may improve behavior, “Michelle Healy, USA Today, February 18, 2013.

Medwire (2/19, Davenport) reports, “Men with first-episode psychosis [FEP] have more severe symptoms than women and are less likely to achieve recovery,” according to a 578-patient study published online Feb. 8 in the journal European Psychiatry. Even though “women were significantly more likely to attempt suicide during follow up, men were significantly more likely to die, at 14% versus 1%, and more likely to commit suicide, at 2.0% versus 0.4%,” the study revealed. “Conversely, women were more likely than men to meet the researchers’ criteria for recovery, with the difference being significant at two and five years of follow-up.”

Related Links:

— “First-episode psychosis hits men hard, “Liam Davenport, Medwire News, February 19, 2013.

MedPage Today (2/18, Walsh) reported, “Whether soldiers in combat develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) depends on their perception and attention to threat, the intensity of combat they are exposed to, and genetic susceptibility,” according to a study published online Feb. 13 in JAMA Psychiatry. The study, which included 1,085 Israeli soldiers followed for two years, revealed “a significant interaction…between attention to threat and degree of combat exposure (β = −0.73, 95% CI −0.45 to −0.08, P<0.004)." In addition, "a three-way interaction was observed between pre-deployment threat bias, combat exposure, and a polymorphism in the serotonin transporter gene (β = 0.62, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.19, P<0.01)," the study found. The study was partially supported by the National Institute of Mental Health. Related Links:

— “Combat PTSD Tied to Intensity of Fight, “Nancy Walsh, Medpage Today, February 17, 2013.

HealthDay (2/19, Dotinga) reports, “A protective effect in females may help explain one of the biggest mysteries of autism: Why boys are five times more likely to develop the developmental brain disorder than girls.” The study of “more than 3,800 pairs of non-identical twins from Great Britain and more than 6,000 pairs of non-identical twins from Sweden” indicated that “developing females are much better able than males to fight off genetic pressure to develop symptoms of autism.” The research was published online Feb. 18 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Related Links:

— “Researchers Detect an Anti-Autism Advantage in Females,” Randy Dotinga, HealthDay, February 18, 2013.

Medwire (2/1) says Valeria Mondelli at King’s College London led a study, published in the Journal of Psychiatric Research, that found schizophrenia patients “commonly have a poor diet,” which “may partly account for the increased incidence of metabolic abnormalities in these patients. The poor diet was mainly characterized by a high intake of saturated fat and calories and a low consumption of fiber and fruit.” The researchers wrote, “We can only suggest that a poor diet represents one of the factors involved in the development of metabolic abnormalities.”

Related Links:

— “Poor diet provides clue to metabolic abnormalities in schizophrenia, “Lucy Piper, Medwire News, February 1, 2013.

The New York Times (2/1, Goode, Healy, Subscription Publication, 1.68M) says some mental health experts have scrutinized many state proposals to bolster mental health services in response to the Newtown school shooting – proposals they deem hastily executed, “politically expedient,” and “unlikely to repair a broken mental health system.” Some mental health and legal experts “say that politicians’ efforts might be better spent making the process of involuntary psychiatric commitment – and the criteria for restricting firearms access once someone has been forcibly committed – consistent from state to state. And some proposals have caused concern, raising questions about doctor-patient confidentiality, the rights of people with psychiatric disabilities and the integrity of clinical judgment.”

McClatchy (2/1, Pugh) says healthcare advocates lobbying in the nation’s statehouses “hope growing tax revenues and renewed outrage over gun violence will lead lawmakers to boost funding” for mental health services, even though the states cut a collective $4.4 billion from their mental health budgets from 2009 to 2012, according to the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors. In South Carolina, “where the state mental health budget has shrunk by $74 million since 2009, Republican Gov. Nikki Haley is calling for an $11 million increase for the state’s beleaguered mental health agency.” Meanwhile, in Idaho, Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter “is backing plans to have the Department of Correction build a $70 million hospital to house nearly 600 mentally ill prisoners, along with non-offenders who’ve been involuntarily committed by the courts.”

Stigma of mental illness an obstacle to diagnosis, treatment. CBS Evening News (1/31, story 7, 4:00, Pelley, 5.58M)says Connecticut lawmakers, in a recent hearing on gun violence, listened to testimony from Sandy Hook library clerk Marianne Jacobs, who called for better mental health services for children. “We don’t know what drove the gunman in Newtown to kill, and the fact is that 95% of violent acts are committed by people with no serious mental illness. Even so, the shooting has put a spotlight on the treatment for the mentally ill.” The report profiles Zac Pogliano, who heard voices for a year until he was diagnosed with schizophrenia. He delayed the diagnosis fearing the stigma associated with mental illness, but pharmaceutical and outpatient treatment have put him on a better path. His story “is a reminder that the stigma attached to mental illness makes people ashamed to admit their symptoms. Until that stigma is erased there will continue to be a delay in the proper diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric disease.”

Survey: Majority back gun control, more mental healthcare. The Los Angeles Times (1/31, Healy, 692K) says the New England Journal of Medicine published a survey, conducted between January 2-14, that found “a majority of Americans – gun owners and non-owners alike – support stricter measures to keep handguns from people under 21 and to block ownership of any guns for 10 years by those who have perpetrated domestic violence, brandished a weapon in a threatening manner, or committed two or more drug- or alcohol-related crimes. … Almost 70% of respondents supported greater government spending and insurance coverage for mental healthcare as a means of averting gun violence.” Between 75% and 85% of respondents said that states, healthcare providers, and the military “should be required to notify a central background-check registry when a person has been declared mentally incompetent or committed to psychiatric care involuntarily, has threatened to harm himself or others, or has been rejected from service due to mental illness or drug- or alcohol-abuse.”

Related Links:

— “Focus on Mental Health Laws to Curb Violence Is Unfair, Some Say, “Erica Goode, The New York Times, February 1, 2013.

Medwire (2/2, McDermid) reported, “Delirium occurs in about one in five inpatients, but appears to be a low priority with hospital staff,” according to a study published Jan. 7 in the journal BMJ Open. Researchers “assessed the occurrence of delirium across an entire tertiary hospital during a single day, excluding patients in the emergency department, the intensive care unit, and isolation rooms, as well as those who were severely aphasic.” Notably, “the rates of delirium among the 280 patients assessed were 19.6% according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV criteria, 17.6% with the Confusion Assessment Method, and 20.7% with the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98.”

Related Links:

— “Delirium overlooked in hospital patients,”Eleanor McDermid, Medwire News, February 1, 2013.