Psychopathological Assessment of Risk of Restraint in Acute Psychiatric Patients

The patient journey project in Italian mental health services: results from a co-designed survey on clinical interventions and current barriers to improve the care of people living with schizophrenia

Introduction

The Patient Journey Project aimed to analyze the scenario among Italian Mental Health Services (MHS) to understand the clinical interventions that are properly implemented and the ones deserving further implementation to design an effective treatment plan for patients living with schizophrenia (PLWS).

Methods

The 60-items survey was co-designed with all the stakeholders (clinicians, expert patients and caregivers) involved in the Patient Journey and focused on three phases of schizophrenia course: early detection and management, acute phase management, long-term management/continuity of care. Respondents were Heads of the Mental Health Departments and Addiction Services (MHDAS) or facilities directors throughout Italian MHS. For each statement, respondents expressed the consensus on the importance and the degree of implementation in clinical practice.

Results

Considering the importance of the statement, strong consensus was reached for most of the statements. Good levels of implementation were found on 2/17 statements of early detection and management, on 3/16 statements for acute phase management and on 1/27 statements of long-term management/continuity of care. Poor levels of implementation were found on 1/17 statements of early detection and management, none of acute phase management, and 4/27 statements for long-term management/continuity of care. Moderate levels of implementation were found on 14/17 statements for early detection and management, on 13/16 statements of acute phase management, and on 22/27 statements of long-term management/continuity of care. Thus, among Italian MHDAS, most interventions for PLWS were moderately implemented in clinical practice.

Discussion

Italian MHS have to provide new strategies and structural actions to overcome these current limitations and barriers to effectively improve the journey of PLWS. The areas that deserve most implementation include interventions during the early stage (especially the continuity of care between Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services and Adult Mental Health Services), the evidence-based psychosocial interventions during the chronic stages of the disorder, and the continuity of care after acute hospitalization.

Predicting coercion during the course of psychiatric hospitalizations

BACKGROUND

Coercive measures (such as seclusion, mechanical restraint, and forced medication) during psychiatric inpatient treatment should be avoided whenever possible. Different interventions were already developed to reduce coercion, but for their effective application, it is crucial to know the risk factors of individuals and clinical situations that might be associated with coercion. Since the results of previous studies differ considerably the current study aims to fill this gap by evaluating the course of the exertion of coercion in detail.

METHODS

In this study, we analyzed clinical, procedural, and sociodemographic data from patients (n = 16,607 cases) who were treated as inpatients in Switzerland's largest psychiatric institution with 320 beds during the years 2017 to 2020. We used regression models to identify predictors for the exertion of coercion, the number of coercive measures during a treatment episode and time until exertion of the first and last coercive measure.

RESULTS

Coercive measures are mostly used during the first days of treatment. We identified clinical parameters such as manic or psychotic episodes to be the most relevant predictors for the exertion of coercion. Cases with those disorders also received coercion more often and earlier in their treatment course than other diagnostic groups. Other promoting factors for frequency and early application of coercion were involuntary admission and factors of chronicity and clinical severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowing the risk factors may help to target preventive strategies for those at highest risk. In particular, interventions should focus on the critical timeframe at the beginning of treatment.

Prevalence and risk factors for seclusion and restraint in old-age psychiatry inpatient units

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Coercion in psychiatry is legally tolerated as a last resort. The reduction of the use of coercion is a shared goal of hospital administrators, medical and nursing staff and representatives of patients and families but requires the identification of risk factors for coercion. These risk factors in geriatric psychiatric inpatient settings are not well known, especially regarding seclusion. Through examining the prevalence of coercion and patients' characteristics, this study aims to identify risk factors for coercion in elderly people.

METHODS

The use of coercion in the geriatric psychiatry division of Geneva University Hospital in 2017 was retrospectively analyzed. The incidence rate ratios were estimated with multivariable Poisson regressions to assess risk factors for coercion.

RESULTS

Eighty-one of 494 patients (16.4%) experienced at least one coercive measure during their stay (mainly seclusion). The risk factors for coercion were younger age, male gender, being divorced or married, cognitive disorders, high item 1 of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) score (overactive, aggressive, disruptive or agitated behavior) at admission, previous psychiatric hospitalizations and involuntary referrals from the emergency department. Other disorders and global HoNOS scores were not associated with the use of coercion.

CONCLUSION

Higher risks of coercion were outlined in men with cognitive disorders, agitated behaviors, and previous psychiatric hospitalizations. They differed from those observed in younger adults in terms of age, civil status, disorders, global HoNOS scores and referrals. Therefore, geriatric psychiatric populations should be specifically investigated for the development of interventions aiming coercion reduction.

Assessment of Risk for Seclusion Among Forensic Inpatients: Validation and Modification of the Risk of Administrative Segregation Tool (RAST)

Seclusion is used in psychiatric care to protect patients and staff or to manage aggression but may have adverse effects. The ability to identify at-risk patients could help reduce seclusion. This study tested the Risk of Administrative Segregation Tool's (RAST) ability to predict any seclusions among 229 male forensic inpatients followed for up to 1 year of hospitalization, and days spent secluded, controlling for length of stay. RAST scores were lower than in correctional samples. The RAST did not predict seclusions in Year 1, but modification of three items to fit the forensic population (RAST-F) offered a small improvement. Among 62 patients hospitalized for more than 1 year, the RAST significantly predicted seclusions in Year 2, and the modifications improved prediction. The present modest findings support the RAST's potential to help identify patients most in need of clinical efforts to avert seclusion. Replication in larger samples, including female patients, is needed.

Factor structure of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale - Expanded (BPRS-E) in a large hospitalized sample

Meta-analytically derived models of the BPRS-E factor structure were tested on a large (n = 33,903) hospitalized sample using confirmatory factor analysis. A modified four factor model (Positive symptoms, Negative symptoms, Affect, and Activation) containing 12 core BPRS-E symptoms based on the meta-analytic models had excellent model fit. An additional five factor, 15 core symptom model, which added a Disorganization factor consistent with the pentagonal model of schizophrenic symptoms also had support with generally good fit. These factors demonstrated acceptable reliability as measured by coefficient alpha (M = 0.77). These factors were compared across three major diagnostic classes and indicated clinically relevant differences between these groups such as depressed patients having higher Affect scores (d = 1.03), manic-mixed episode patients having higher Activation scores (d = 0.83) and schizophrenic patients having higher Positive Symptom scores (d = 0.89) providing evidence for the validity of these factors. Further exploratory factor analyses provided support for the factors of Positive symptoms, Negative symptoms, Affect, and Activation with additional smaller and less robust factors corresponding to Resistance emerging as a fifth factor and Disorganization emerging as a sixth factor.