Characterizing psychopharmacological prescribing practices in a large cohort of adolescents with borderline personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: Psychiatric medications are not efficacious for treating borderline personality disorder (BPD), yet many patients with BPD are prescribed multiple psychiatric medications. This study aimed to (1) characterize psychiatric medication prescribing practices in adolescents with BPD and (2) assess whether demographic features are associated with prescribing practices. METHOD: This sample was N = 2950 pediatric patients with BPD (ages 10-19) across the U.S. Data came from the NeuroBlu database, which includes data from 30 U.S. healthcare systems and hundreds of hospitals. Poisson regressions and chi-squared tests determined whether gender, race, and ethnicity were associated with (1) number of unique psychiatric medications prescribed and (2) number of unique medication classes prescribed. RESULTS: Roughly two-thirds (64.85%) of youth were prescribed any medications. Of these youth, 79.40% were prescribed ≥ 2 unique medications and 72.66% were prescribed ≥ 2 unique medications classes. The mean number of unique medications was 3.50 (SD = 2.50). The mean number of unique medication classes was 2.35 (SD = 1.15). The most commonly prescribed medication classes were antidepressants and antipsychotics, which were often prescribed in combination. Poisson regressions showed that boys were prescribed more unique medications (M = 3.67) than girls (M = 3.47). Non-Latinx youth were prescribed significantly more unique medications (M = 44.12) than Latinx youth (M = 3.60, p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Results characterize psychiatric medication prescribing practices in youth with BPD. Prescribing practices vary by demographics, such that boys and non-Latinx youth are prescribed more medications than girls and Latinx youth, respectively. These demographic differences suggest that prescribers may treat BPD differently based on patient demographic characteristics.

Empowering Psychiatric Inpatients to Vote: Perceptions of Voting and the Barriers Encountered.

Individuals with psychiatric illness believe that voting is important. However, these individuals have lower rates of voting when compared to the general population. A survey of psychiatrically hospitalized adult patients was conducted to assess perceptions of and barriers to voting in patients with psychiatric illness. Data from 113 surveys was analyzed. A majority of survey participants agreed that they cared about voting, that their vote made a difference, and that their vote was important. 74% of individuals reported previously experiencing at least one barrier when exercising their right to vote. The most commonly experienced barriers reported were not having enough information to make an informed choice, not knowing where to vote, not having transportation, and not being registered to vote. Individuals who encountered a higher number of barriers in the past had a higher chance of encountering barriers more often. In conclusion, a high percentage of individuals with mental illness severe enough to warrant hospitalization have experienced barriers to voting, with many experiencing multiple barriers. Reduction of these barriers is important, as voting and the resultant public policies can directly affect this population's mental health and access to both mental and physical healthcare services.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Psychiatric Acuity in a Community Psychiatric Hospital.

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic has had extensive impacts on mental health care delivery. Anecdotal observations of inpatient care teams at Pennsylvania Psychiatric Institute suggested increased patient acuity during the pandemic. The authors found no consensus definition for measuring psychiatric acuity in the literature. We performed an interrupted time series analysis to identify whether COVID-19 was associated with changes in several hospital parameters that might reflect our patients' access to psychiatric services and acuity. We found increases in inpatient parameters for length of stay, rates of involuntary admissions, and the incidence of restraints, seclusion, and 1:1 observation orders. Observing these increasing trends can inform mitigation efforts to improve the quality of mental health care treatment and care delivery. We suggest the use of these metrics for objective measurements of psychiatric acuity.

Psychiatry's Obligation to Promote Voting Among Patients With Mental Illness.

The American Medical Association adopted a resolution in June 2022 recognizing voting as a social determinant of health. As psychiatric professionals and trainees with experience in civic health, the authors argue that psychiatrists must consider the relationship between voting and mental health as part of care delivery. People with psychiatric illness can experience unique barriers to voting and garner mental health benefits from civic engagement. Provider-led activities to promote voting are accessible and simple. Given the benefits of voting, and the availability of interventions to foster voter engagement, psychiatrists have an obligation to promote voting access among their patients.

Pennsylvania coordinated specialty care programs for first-episode psychosis: 6- and 12-month outcomes.

AIM: Pennsylvania (PA) first-episode psychosis (FEP) program evaluation is a statewide initiative, supported by the PA Office of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (PA-OMHSAS) and administered by PA Early Intervention Center/Heads Up, which evaluates fidelity and outcomes of PA Coordinated Specialty Care (CSC) programs. Programs participate in standard computerized measures of CSC outcomes using centralized informatics. The aims of the current report are to describe implementation of this core battery for program evaluation in PA and to present 6- and 12-month outcomes. METHODS: Participants (n = 697) from nine PA CSC programs completed the core battery at admission. The battery was re-administered at 6- and 12-month follow-up, and data were analysed for individuals (n = 230) who had completed 12-months of treatment. Domains assessed via clinician report and/or self-report included symptoms, role and social functioning, self-perceived recovery and service utilization. RESULTS: PA FEP CSC participants showed improvement over time in several domains, including decreased symptoms, higher role and social functioning, decreased hospitalizations, and improved self-perception of recovery, quality of life, and services satisfaction. Trends towards improvements were observed for participant happiness, hopelessness, and school-enrolment. Nearly all improvements were observed at 6-month follow-up, with earlier gains maintained at 12-months. CONCLUSIONS: PA FEP CSC programs demonstrate the ability to assess and improve critical outcomes of coordinated specialty care in PA. Improved outcomes by 12 months in treatment provides evidence of an effective treatment model and supports the continuation of these programs in pursuit of our goal of reducing schizophrenia disease burden on individuals and society.