Intoxicated persons showing challenging behavior demand complexity interventions: a pilot study at the interface of the ER and the complexity intervention unit.

Intoxicated persons showing challenging behavior (IPCBs) under influence of alcohol and/or drugs frequently have trouble finding appropriate acute care. Often IPCBs are stigmatized being unwilling or unable to accept help. Separated physical and mental healthcare systems hamper integrated acute care for IPCBs. This pilot aimed to substantiate the physical, psychiatric, and social health needs of IPCBs visiting the emergency room (ER) during a 3-month period. All ER visits were screened. After triage by the ER physician, indicated IPCBs were additionally assessed by the consultation-liaison-psychiatry physician. If needed, IPCBs were admitted to a complexity intervention unit for further examinations to provide integrated treatments and appropriate follow-up care. The INTERMED and Health of the Nation Outcome Scale (HoNOS) questionnaires were used to substantiate the complexity and needs. Field-relevant stakeholders were interviewed about this approach for acute integrated care. Alongside substance abuse, almost half of identified IPCBs suffered from comorbid psychiatric disturbances and one third showed substantial physical conditions requiring immediate medical intervention. Almost all IPCBs (96%) accepted the acute medical care voluntarily. IPCBs showed high mean initial scores of INTERMED (27.8 ± 10.0) and HoNOS (20.8 ± 6.9). At discharge from the complexity intervention unit, the mean HoNOS score decreased significantly (13.4 ± 8.6; P < 0.001). Field-relevant stakeholders strongly supported the interdisciplinary approach and ER-facility for IPCBs and acknowledged their unmet health needs. A biopsychosocial assessment at the ER, followed by a short admission if necessary, is effective in IPCBs. This approach helps to merge separated healthcare systems and may reduce stigmatization of IPCBs needing help.

The state of psychiatry in the Netherlands: strength by quality, influence by capabilities.

Psychiatry and mental healthcare in the Netherlands has a long history of institutional care, slowly more adapted to the community, but differentiated from mainstream healthcare in terms of organization and remuneration. It is in a crucial phase of reconsideration. Along with harsh cuts on the budgets in healthcare, the field is in transition where training is concerned. The good news is that in fruitful cooperation the government and all spcialist parties involved in mental healthcare are on the verge of reaching an important agreement that should make mental healthcare more patient centred, affordable and accessible for those who need it. The bad news that needs serious consideration and ongoing action is that mental health problems are still highly stigmatized and that as a result the government could impose an unjust and unfair own financial contribution for users in mental care as a means of lowering the costs in the field.

Organization and Outcomes of Integrated Inpatient Medical and Psychiatric Care Units: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review was to assess the relationships among aims, designs, and outcomes of integrated inpatient medical and psychiatric care units (IMPUs) and gather the evidence base on the effectiveness of these units. METHODS: Using online searches of Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, the authors identified and reviewed literature describing the aims and outcomes of specific IMPU designs. RESULTS: The search yielded 55 studies, in which the authors identified 39 IMPUs that focused on patients with mood, psychotic, somatic symptom, substance use, organic, and personality disorders and a broad array of medical diagnoses. Most units were psychiatric-medical units and had medium medical and psychiatric acuity capabilities. The studies reviewed provided little information on the cost-effectiveness of various IMPU designs. Although some comparative studies indicated reductions in hospital length of stay (LOS), these studies were generally of low quality and rarely reported other intended outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: IMPUs may help shorten LOS. IMPUs should focus care on patients with complex conditions and high acuity to maximize health system value. Implementing compulsory admission facilities; qualified psychiatric, medical, and nursing staff involvement; and cross-disciplinary training may improve IMPUs' capacity to treat high-acuity patients. Future research should relate IMPU designs to intended outcomes.

Specialty Psychiatric Services in US Emergency Departments and General Hospitals: Results From a Nationwide Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the handling of psychiatric patients in medical hospitals and emergency departments (EDs) as well as hospital characteristics associated with the availability of psychiatric services in these settings. METHODS: From October 1, 2017, to April 1, 2018, a telephone survey regarding the presence and nature of psychiatric services was attempted among all US registered Medicare hospitals. RESULTS: Of the included 4812 US hospitals, 2394 (50%) were surveyed. Of these hospitals, 1108 (46%) have some psychiatric services available, either in medical EDs or through psychiatric consultation on general medical inpatient wards. If medical ED patients with active psychiatric issues need admission, 59% of hospitals transfer the patient to a different hospital and 28% admit the patient to a medical ward. Exploration by logistic regression analysis of the association of selected variables and available psychiatric expertise suggested that larger hospitals, nonprofit services, or hospitals in urban settings were more likely to have psychiatrists on staff or available for consultation. CONCLUSION: Despite the growing number of psychiatric patients seeking help in medical EDs and general hospitals, more than 50% of the EDs and general hospitals lack psychiatric services. These results suggest that accessibility to psychiatric care in medical settings requires improvement.

Identifying value-based quality indicators for general hospital psychiatry.

OBJECTIVE: To define generic quality indicators for general hospital psychiatry from the perspectives of patients, professionals (physicians, nurses, and managers), and payers (health insurance companies). METHODS: Quality variables were identified by reviewing the relevant literature. A working. group consisting of patients', professionals' and payers' representatives was mandated by their respective umbrella organizations. The working group prioritized the quality variables that were identified. Core values were defined and subsequently linked to preliminary quality indicators. These were tested for feasibility in ten hospitals in a four-week period. Stakeholder consultation took place by means of two invitational conferences and two written commentary rounds. RESULTS: Forty-one quality variables were identified from the literature. After prioritization, seven core values were defined and translated to 22 preliminary indicators. Overall, the feasibility study showed high relevance scores and good implementability of the preliminary quality indicators. A final set of twenty-two quality indicators (17 structure, 3 process and 2 outcome indicators) was then established using a consensus-based approach. CONCLUSION: Consensus on a quality framework for general hospital psychiatry was built by incorporating the perspectives of relevant stakeholders. Results of the feasibility study suggest broad support and good implementability of the final quality indicators. Structural indicators were broadly defined, and process and outcome indicators are generic to facilitate quality measurement across settings. The quality indicator set can now be used to facilitate quality and outcome assessment, stimulate standardization of services, and help demonstrate (cost-) effectiveness.