RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Emergency departments (EDs) have been increasingly utilized over time for psychiatric care. While multiple studies have assessed these trends in nationally representative data, few have evaluated these trends in state-level data. This investigation seeks to understand the mental health-related ED burden in North Carolina (NC) by describing trends in ED visits associated with a mental health diagnosis (MHD) over time. METHODS: Using data from NC DETECT, this investigation describes trends in NC ED visits from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2014 by presence of a MHD code. A visit was classified by the first listed MHD ICD-9-CM code in the surveillance record and MHD codes were grouped into related categories for analysis. Visits were summarized by MHD status and by MHD category. RESULTS: Over 32 million ED visits were recorded from 2008 to 2014, of which 3,030,746 (9.4%) were MHD-related visits. The average age at presentation for MHD-related visits was 50 years (SD 23.5) and 63.9% of visits were from female patients. The proportion of ED visits with a MHD increased from 8.3 to 10.2% from 2008 to 2014. Annually and overall, the largest diagnostic category was stress/anxiety/depression. Hospital admissions resulting from MHD-related visits declined from 32.2 to 18.5% from 2008 to 2014 but remained consistently higher than the rate of admissions among non-MHD visits. CONCLUSION: Similar to national trends, the proportion of ED visits associated with a MHD in NC has increased over time. This indicates a need for continued surveillance, both stateside and nationally, in order to inform future efforts to mitigate the growing ED burden.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Medical training focuses heavily on clinical skills but lacks in training for navigating challenging clinical scenarios especially with regard to diversity issues. Our objective was to assess third-year medical students' preparedness to navigate such scenarios. METHODS: A 24-item survey was administered electronically to third-year medical students describing a range of specific interactions with patients, peers, and "upper-levels" or superiors including residents and attendings, spanning subjects including gender, race/ethnicity, politics, age, sexual orientation/identity, disability, and religion. Students rated their level of comfort via a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("Very Uncomfortable") to 5 ("Very Comfortable"). Basic demographics were collected and data were summarized for trends. RESULTS: Data were analyzed from 120 students (67% response rate, 54.2% female, 60.8% non-Hispanic white). Students reported lower comfort with peer and superiors compared to patient interactions (p < 0.0001). Students reported the highest comfort with sexual orientation/identity- and religion-related interactions (median (IQR): 3.3 (1.3) and 3.4 (10.0), respectively) and the lowest comfort with gender-, race/ethnicity-, and disability- related interactions (median (IQR): 2.3 (1.3), 2.0 (1.0), 2.5 (1.5), respectively). Males reported significantly higher median comfort levels for scenarios with upper-level, gender, and religion related interactions. Males were more likely to be completely comfortable versus females across the 24 scenarios, although multiple male response patterns showed evidence of a bimodal distribution. CONCLUSIONS: Third-year medical students report generally inadequate comfort with navigating complex clinical scenarios, particularly with peers and supervisors and relating to gender-, race/ethnicity-, and disability-specific conflicts. There are differences across gender with regards to median comfort and distribution of scores suggesting that there is a subgroup of males report high/very high comfort with challenging clinical scenarios. Students may benefit from enhanced training modules and personalized toolkits for navigating these scenarios.
