Spanish experts consensus on emergency psychiatric care in hospital emergency departments.

BACKGROUND: The demand for urgent psychiatric care is increasing, but in Spain there are no clear recommendations for emergency departments (ED) on how to optimize care for patients with psychiatric emergencies. We aimed to provide expert consensus recommendations on the requirements for general hospitals´ emergency departments to treat patients with urgent psychiatric symptoms. METHODS: We used a modified Delphi technique. A scientific committee compiled 36 statements based on literature search and clinical experience. The statements covered the organizational model, facilities, staffing, safety, patient interventions, and staff training. A panel of 38 psychiatry specialists with expertise in psychiatric emergencies evaluated the questionnaire in two rounds. RESULTS: After two rounds of voting, 30 out of 36 proposed items (83%) were agreed upon. The panel agreed that psychiatric emergencies should be managed in a general hospital, with dedicated facilities for patient assessment, direct supervision of patients at risk, and an observation unit run by the psychiatric service. In addition to the psychiatrist, the ED should have specialist nurses and security staff available 24/7. Social workers should also be readily available. ED and consulting rooms should be designed to ensure patient and staff safety. A triage system should be established for patients with psychiatric symptoms, with medical evaluation preceding psychiatric evaluation. Guidance on supplies, equipment, and staff training is also provided. CONCLUSION: All ED in general hospitals should have adequate resources to handle any psychiatric emergency. This paper provides recommendations on the minimum requirements to achieve this goal.

Proxy measures for the assessment of psychotic and affective symptoms in studies using electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of standardised psychometric data in electronic health record (EHR)-based research. Proxy measures of symptom severity based on patients' clinical records may be useful surrogates in mental health EHR research. AIMS: This study aimed to validate proxy tools for the short versions of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-6), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS-6) and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS-6). METHOD: A cross-sectional, multicentre study was conducted in a sample of 116 patients with first-episode psychosis from 12 public hospitals in Spain. Concordance between PANSS-6, YMRS-6 and MADRS-6 scores and their respective proxies was evaluated based on information from EHR clinical notes, using a variety of statistical procedures, including multivariate tests to adjust for potential confounders. Bootstrapping techniques were used for internal validation, and an independent cohort from the Treatment and Early Intervention in Psychosis Program (TIPP-Lausanne, Switzerland) for external validation. RESULTS: The proxy versions correlated strongly with their respective standardised scales (partial correlations ranged from 0.75 to 0.84) and had good accuracy and discriminatory power in distinguishing between patients in and not in remission (percentage of patients correctly classified ranged from 83.9 to 91.4% and bootstrapped optimism-corrected area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.76 to 0.89), with high interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81). The findings remained robust in the external validation data-set. CONCLUSIONS: The proxy instruments proposed for assessing psychotic and affective symptoms by reviewing EHR provide a feasible and reliable alternative to traditional structured psychometric procedures, and a promising methodology for real-world practice settings.