Psychiatric emergency "surge capacity" following acts of terrorism and mass violence with high media impact: what is required?

OBJECTIVE: Adequate preparedness for acts of terrorism and mass violence requires a thorough understanding of the postdisaster mental health needs of all exposed groups, including those watching such events from a distance. This study examined emergency psychiatric treatment-seeking patterns following media exposure to four national terrorist or mass casualty events. METHOD: An event was selected for study if (a) it precipitated local front-page headlines for >5 consecutive days and (b) emergency service psychiatrists identified it as specifically precipitating help-seeking in the study hospital. Four events qualified: the Oklahoma City bombing (1995), the Columbine High School (1999) and Wedgewood Baptist Church (1999) shootings and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Time-series analyses were used to correct for autocorrelation in visit patterns during the postdisaster week, and equivalent time periods from years before and after each event were used as control years. RESULTS: Overall, disaster week census did not differ significantly from predisaster weeks, although 3-day nonsignificant decreases in visit rate were observed following each disaster. Treatment-seeking for anxiety-related issues showed a nonsignificant increase following each disaster, which became significant in the "all disaster" model (t=5.17; P=.006). Intensity of media coverage did not impact rate of help-seeking in any analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although these sentinel US disasters varied in scope, method, geographic proximity to the study site, perpetrator characteristics, public response, sequelae and degree of media coverage, the extent to which they impacted emergency department treatment-seeking was minimal. Geographically distant mass violence and disaster events of the type and scope studied here may require only minimal mental health "surge capacity" in the days following the event.

Measuring progressive independence with the resident supervision index: theoretical approach.

BACKGROUND: Graduate medical education is based on an on-the-job training model in which residents provide clinical care under supervision. The traditional method is to offer residents graduated levels of responsibility that will prepare them for independent practice. However, if progressive independence from supervision exceeds residents' progressive professional development, patient outcomes may be at risk. Leaders in graduate medical education have called for "optimal" supervision, yet few studies have conceptually defined what optimal supervision means and whether optimal care is theoretically compatible with progressive independence, nor have they developed a test for progressive independence. OBJECTIVE: This research develops theory and analytic models as part of the Resident Supervision Index to quantify the intensity of supervision. METHODS: We introduce an explicit set of assumptions for an ideal patient-centered theory of optimal supervision of resident-provided care. A critical assumption is that informed attending staff will use available resources to optimize patient outcomes first and foremost, with residents gaining clinical competencies by contributing to optimal care. Next, we derive mathematically the consequences of these assumptions as theoretical results. RESULTS: Under optimal supervision, (1) patient outcome is expected to be no worse than if residents were not involved, (2) supervisors will avoid undersupervising residents (when patients are at increased risk for poor outcomes) or oversupervising residents (when residents miss clinical opportunities to practice care), (3) optimal patient outcomes will be compatible with progressive independence, (4) progressive development can be inferred from progressive independence whenever residents contribute to patient care, and (5) analytic models that test for progressive independence will emphasize adjusting the association between length of graduate medical education training and supervision for case complexity and clinic workload, but not patient health outcomes. CONCLUSION: An explicit theoretical framework is critical to measure scientifically progressive independence from supervision using graduate medical education data.

Measuring progressive independence with the resident supervision index: empirical approach.

BACKGROUND: A Resident Supervision Index (RSI) developed by our research team quantifies the intensity of resident supervision in graduate medical education, with the goal of testing for progressive independence. The 4-part RSI method includes a survey instrument for staff and residents (RSI Inventory), a strategy to score survey responses, a theoretical framework (patient centered optimal supervision), and a statistical model that accounts for the presence or absence of supervision and the intensity of patient care. METHODS: The RSI Inventory data came from 140 outpatient encounters involving 57 residents and 37 attending physicians during a 3-month period at a Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic. Responses are scored to quantitatively measure the intensity of resident supervision across 10 levels of patient services (staff is absent, is present, participated, or provided care with or without a resident), case discussion (resident-staff interaction), and oversight (staff reviewed case, reviewed medical chart, consulted with staff, or assessed patient). Scores are analyzed by level and for patient care using a 2-part model (supervision initiated [yes or no] versus intensity once supervision was initiated). RESULTS: All resident encounters had patient care supervision, resident oversight, or both. Consistent with the progressive independence hypothesis, residents were 1.72 (P  =  .019) times more likely to be fully responsible for patient care with each additional postgraduate year. Decreasing case complexity, increasing clinic workload, and advanced nonmedical degrees among attending staff were negatively associated with supervision intensity, although associations varied by supervision level. CONCLUSIONS: These data are consistent with the progressive independence hypothesis in graduate medical education and offer empirical support for the 4-part RSI method to quantify the intensity of resident supervision for research, program evaluation, and resident assessment purposes. Before informing policy, however, more scientific research in actual teaching settings is needed to better understand the relationships among patient outcomes, clinic workload, case complexity, and graduate medical education experience in resident supervision and professional development.