Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Short Treatment Allocation Tool for Eating Disorders: current practices in assigning patients to level of care.
Geller, Josie; Isserlin, Leanna; Seale, Emily; Iyar, Megumi M; Coelho, Jennifer S; Srikameswaran, Suja; Norris, Mark.
Afiliação
  • Geller J; 1Eating Disorders Program, St. Paul's Hospital, 1081 Burrard Street, Vancouver, British Columbia V6Z 1Y6 Canada.
  • Isserlin L; 2Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia Canada.
  • Seale E; 3Department of Psychiatry, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario Canada.
  • Iyar MM; 3Department of Psychiatry, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario Canada.
  • Coelho JS; 1Eating Disorders Program, St. Paul's Hospital, 1081 Burrard Street, Vancouver, British Columbia V6Z 1Y6 Canada.
  • Srikameswaran S; 4Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia Canada.
  • Norris M; 2Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia Canada.
J Eat Disord ; 6: 45, 2018.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30619608
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

The Short Treatment Allocation Tool for Eating Disorders (STATED) is a new evidence-based algorithm developed to match patients to the most clinically appropriate and cost-effective level of care (Geller et al., 2016). The objective of this research was to examine the extent to which current practices are in alignment with STATED recommendations.

METHOD:

Participants were 179 healthcare professionals providing care for youth and/or adults with eating disorders. They completed an online survey and rated the extent to which three patient dimensions (medical stability, symptom severity, and readiness) were used in assigning patients to each of five levels of care.

RESULTS:

The majority of analyses testing a priori hypotheses based on the STATED were statistically significant (all p's < .001), in the direction of STATED recommendations. However, a strict coding scheme evaluating the extent to which ratings were fully consistent with the STATED showed inconsistency rates ranging from 17 to 55% across the five levels of care, with the greatest inconsistencies involving the use of readiness information, and the lowest involving the use of medical stability information.

DISCUSSION:

Although practices were generally aligned with the STATED recommendations, readiness information was used least consistently in assigning patients to level of care.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article