Effect of changing referral mode to C-L Psychiatry for noncognitively impaired medical inpatients with emotional disorders

Reliability and validity of the brief psychosomatic symptom scale (BPSS) in patients from general hospitals

OBJECTIVES

To verify the Brief Psychosomatic Symptom Scale (BPSS) among patients with psychosomatic-related disorders in general hospitals and determine the threshold of BPSS.

METHODS

The BPSS is a shortened 10-item version of the psychosomatic symptoms scale (PSSS). Data from 483 patients and 388 healthy controls were included for psychometric analyses. Internal consistency, construct validity, and factorial validity were verified. The threshold of BPSS in distinguishing psychosomatic patients from healthy controls were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The ROC curve of the BPSS was compared with that of the PSSS and patient health questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) by using Venkatraman's method with 2000 times Monte-Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

The reliability of the BPSS was good with Cronbach's α of 0.831. BPSS was significantly correlated with PSSS (r = 0.886, P < 0.001), PHQ-15 (r = 0.752, P < 0.001), PHQ-9 (r = 0.757, P < 0.001) and GAD-7 (r = 0.715, P < 0.001), which indicated good construct validity. ROC analyses demonstrated that the AUC of the BPSS was comparable with that of PSSS. The gender-specific threshold of BPSS was determined as ≥8 in males and ≥ 9 in females.

CONCLUSIONS

The BPSS is a brief and validated instrument for screening common psychosomatic symptoms.

Proactive Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry: American Psychiatric Association Resource Document

In 2019, the American Psychiatric Association Council on Consultation-Liaison (C-L) Psychiatry convened a work group to develop a resource document on proactive C-L psychiatry. A draft of this document was reviewed by the Council in July 2020, and a revised version was approved by this Council in September 2020. The accepted version was subsequently reviewed by the American Psychiatric Association Council on Health Care Systems and Financing in November 2020. The final version was approved by the Joint Reference Committee on November 24, 2020, and received approval for publication by the Board of Trustees on December 12, 2020. This resource document describes the historical context and modern trends that have given rise to the model of proactive C-L psychiatry. Styled as an inpatient corollary to outpatient collaborative care models, proactive C-L provides a framework of mental health care delivery in the general hospital designed to enhance mental health services to a broad range of patients. Its 4 elements include systematic screening for active mental health concerns, proactive interventions tailored to individual patients, team-based care delivery, and care integration with primary teams and services. Studies have found that proactive C-L psychiatry is associated with reduced hospital length of stay, enhanced psychiatric service utilization, reduced time to psychiatric consultation, and improved provider and nurse satisfaction. These favorable results encourage further studies that replicate and build upon these findings. Additional outcomes such as patient experience, health outcomes, and readmission rates deserve investigation. Further studies are also needed to examine a broader array of team compositions and the potential value of proactive C-L psychiatry to different hospital settings such as community hospitals, surgery, and critical care.

A systematic review of proactive psychiatric consultation on hospital length of stay

OBJECTIVE

Roughly half of general hospital patients may have a psychiatric issue that impacts care, yet most of these are not recognized during hospital admission. Proactive mental health screening offers an opportunity for timely identification and clinical attention to improve outcomes.

METHOD

We conducted a PRISMA systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library for proactive models of psychiatric consultation to reduce hospital length of stay (LOS) in adult inpatients. For each study, we evaluated the level of evidence and defined the study sample, means of group allocation, screening process, interventions, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 12 included studies, the 8 whose screening was informed by clinicians with mental health care expertise or whose providers were integrated with primary services reported a reduction in LOS. Two of these also reported favorable cost-benefit analyses. All positive studies represent versions of either psychiatrists embedded within medical or surgical settings or a multidisciplinary team-based model.

CONCLUSIONS

Proactive CL psychiatry with clinically-informed screening and integrated care delivery appear to reduce LOS. Further studies are needed to explore a broader range of outcomes, hospital populations beyond hospital medicine, and additional benefits of proactive integrated mental health care in the general hospital.

Why are hospital doctors not referring to Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry? - a systemic review

BACKGROUND

Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry (CLP) is a subspecialty of psychiatry that provides care to inpatients under non-psychiatric care. Despite evidence of benefits of CLP for inpatients with psychiatric comorbidities, referral rates from hospital doctors remain low. This review aims to understand barriers to CLP inpatient referral as described in the literature.

METHODS

We searched on Medline, PsychINFO, CINAHL and SCOPUS, using MESH and the following keywords: 1) Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry, Consultation Liaison Psychiatry, Consultation Psychiatry, Liaison Psychiatry, Hospital Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine, the 2) Referral, Consultation, Consultancy and 3) Inpatient, Hospitalized patient, Hospitalized patient. We considered papers published between 1 Jan 1965 and 30 Sep 2015 and all articles written in English that contribute to understanding of barriers to CLP referral were included.

RESULTS

Thirty-five eligible articles were found and they were grouped thematically into three categories: (1) Systemic factors; (2) Referrer factors; (3) Patient factors. Systemic factors that improves referrals include a dedicated CLP service, active CLP consultant and collaborative screening of patients. Referrer factors that increases referrals include doctors of internal medicine specialty and comfortable with CLP. Patients more likely to be referred tend to be young, has psychiatric history, live in an urban setting or has functional psychosis.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review that examines factors that influence CLP inpatient referrals. Although there is research in this area, it is of limited quality. Education could be provided to hospital doctors to better recognise mental illness. Collaborative screening of vulnerable groups could prevent inpatients from missing out on psychiatric care. CLP clinicians should use the knowledge gained in this review to provide quality engagement with referrers.

A medical-surgical nurse's perceptions of caring for a person with severe mental illness

BACKGROUND

When hospitalized for medical conditions, many people with severe mental illness (SMI) have poor outcomes, yet little is known about contributing factors. Studies exploring the care experience from nurses' perspectives described care processes as "difficult." None of these studies were conducted in the United States, and sociocultural contexts significantly affect perceptions of SMI.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this inquiry was to explore a medical-surgical nurse's perceptions of caring for a hospitalized person with SMI in the United States.

DESIGN

A qualitative, descriptive case study was used.

RESULTS

The nurse's experience was characterized by categories of tension, discomfort, lack of professional satisfaction, and difficult.

CONCLUSIONS

This case study revealed a negative care experience, similar to conclusions of investigations conducted in other countries. Understanding of nurses' care experiences can inform efforts to improve practice environments, provide resources, or develop models of care that support nurses who care for patients with SMI and improve health outcomes for people with SMI.

Non-psychiatric hospitalization of people with mental illness: systematic review

AIM

This paper is a report of a literature review of the evidence regarding outcomes experienced by severely mentally ill individuals hospitalized in general medical-surgical settings for non-psychiatric conditions.

BACKGROUND

Severely mentally ill individuals experience chronic medical illnesses at a rate greater than the general population. When hospitalized in non-psychiatric settings, they tend to be experienced as 'difficult' by nurses and to have longer lengths of stay.

DATA SOURCES

The CINAHL and PUBMED databases were searched from 1 to 9 March 2008 to identify studies published between 1998 and 2008 investigating outcomes among people with mental illness hospitalized for non-psychiatric illness in general hospitals.

METHODS

Included studies were those published in English in peer reviewed journals and investigating patient outcomes. The studies were reviewed for relevance and inclusion criteria; the methodological quality of studies was not evaluated.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met inclusion criteria. All studies examining length of stay, costs of care or resource utilization showed increased measures for patients with psychiatric comorbidity. Interventions described included psychiatric liaison psychiatry and nursing, which failed to demonstrate improvement in outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Nurses play a pivotal role in improving the inpatient care of this vulnerable population, but they struggle in their attempts to do so. Research to determine the best approaches to promote nurses' knowledge, positive attitudes and self-confidence in caring for patients with psychiatric comorbidity is needed. Investigation of the patient perspective on the inpatient experience might also provide insight for designing effective care processes.

[Effects of psychotherapeutic interventions on length of stay in cardiology inpatients]

OBJECTIVES

Mental comorbidities as recorded in the DRG system by the Patient Comorbidity and Complication Level (PCCL) cause extended length of stay in cardiology with resultant higher costs. Studies analyzing the influence of a psychiatric consultation and liaison service on the length of stay and the costs incurred thereby have generated inconsistent results. The present prospective study examines the effects of the psychotherapeutic liaison service on the length of stay.

METHODS

In the course of 6 months, two cardiology wards were alternately provided traditional psychotherapeutic consultation and psychotherapeutic liaison service based on a Cross-Over-Design (A-B-A). Inclusion criteria for patients was the presence of one of the four most common cardiological diagnoses (ischemic heart diseases, heart valve defects, cardiomyopathies, arrhythmias). After the exclusion of patients with a length of less than five days, the random sampling comprised n = 317 patients.

RESULTS

The study showed no direct correlation between the intensified care system of the liaison service and a reduction in the length of stay. The results obtained remained consistent even after controlling for age, sex, and case complexity. Recommendations for further investigations are discussed.