Facilitators and barriers of routine psychosocial distress assessment within a stepped and collaborative care model in a Swiss hospital setting.

BACKGROUND: Stepped and Collaborative Care Models (SCCMs) have shown potential for improving mental health care. Most SCCMs have been used in primary care settings. At the core of such models are initial psychosocial distress assessments commonly in form of patient screening. We aimed to assess the feasibility of such assessments in a general hospital setting in Switzerland. METHODS: We conducted and analyzed eighteen semi-structured interviews with nurses and physicians involved in a recent introduction of a SCCM model in a hospital setting, as part of the SomPsyNet project in Basel-Stadt. Following an implementation research approach, we used the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework for analysis. The TICD distinguishes seven domains: guideline factors, individual healthcare professional factors, patient factors, professional interactions, incentives and resources, capacity for organizational change, and social, political, and legal factors. Domains were split into themes and subthemes, which were used for line-by-line coding. RESULTS: Nurses and physicians reported factors belonging to all seven TICD domains. An appropriate integration of the psychosocial distress assessment into preexisting hospital processes and information technology systems was the most important facilitator. Subjectivity of the assessment, lack of awareness about the assessment, and time constraints, particularly among physicians, were factors undermining and limiting the implementation of the psychosocial distress assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness raising through regular training of new employees, feedback on performance and patient benefits, and working with champions and opinion leaders can likely support a successful implementation of routine psychosocial distress assessments. Additionally, aligning psychosocial distress assessments with workflows is essential to assure the sustainability of the procedure in a working context with commonly limited time.

Association of Different Restriction Levels With COVID-19-Related Distress and Mental Health in Somatic Inpatients: A Secondary Analysis of Swiss General Hospital Data.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and related countermeasures hinder health care access and affect mental wellbeing of non-COVID-19 patients. There is lack of evidence on distress and mental health of patients hospitalized due to other reasons than COVID-19-a vulnerable population group in two ways: First, given their risk for physical diseases, they are at increased risk for severe courses and death related to COVID-19. Second, they may struggle particularly with COVID-19 restrictions due to their dependence on social support. Therefore, we investigated the association of intensity of COVID-19 restrictions with levels of COVID-19-related distress, mental health (depression, anxiety, somatic symptom disorder, and mental quality of life), and perceived social support among Swiss general hospital non-COVID-19 inpatients. Methods: We analyzed distress of 873 hospital inpatients not admitted for COVID-19, recruited from internal medicine, gynecology, rheumatology, rehabilitation, acute geriatrics, and geriatric rehabilitation wards of three hospitals. We assessed distress due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and four indicators of mental health: depressive and anxiety symptom severity, psychological distress associated with somatic symptoms, and the mental component of health-related quality of life; additionally, we assessed social support. The data collection period was divided into modest (June 9 to October 18, 2020) and strong (October 19, 2020, to April 17, 2021) COVID-19 restrictions, based on the Oxford Stringency Index for Switzerland. Results: An additional 13% (95%-Confidence Interval 4-21%) and 9% (1-16%) of hospital inpatients reported distress related to leisure time and loneliness, respectively, during strong COVID-19 restrictions compared to times of modest restrictions. There was no evidence for changes in mental health or social support. Conclusions: Focusing on the vulnerable population of general hospital inpatients not admitted for COVID-19, our results suggest that tightening of COVID-19 restrictions in October 2020 was associated with increased COVID-19-related distress regarding leisure time and loneliness, with no evidence for a related decrease in mental health. If this association was causal, safe measures to increase social interaction (e.g., virtual encounters and outdoor activities) are highly warranted. Trial registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04269005.

A qualitative study to investigate Swiss hospital personnel's perceived importance of and experiences with patient's mental-somatic multimorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Mental-somatic multimorbidity in general hospital settings is associated with long hospital stays, frequent rehospitalization, and a deterioration of disease course, thus, highlighting the need for treating hospital patients more holistically. However, there are several challenges to overcome to address mental health conditions in these settings. This study investigated hospital personnel's perceived importance of and experiences with mental-somatic multimorbidities of patients in hospital settings in Basel, Switzerland, with special consideration of the differences between physicians and nurses. METHODS: Eighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with nurses (n = 10) and physicians (n = 8) in different hospitals located in Basel, Switzerland. An inductive approach of the framework analysis was used to develop the themes. RESULTS: Four themes emerged from the data analysis: 1) the relevance of mental-somatic multimorbidity within general hospitals, 2) health professionals managing their emotions towards mental health, 3) knowledge and competencies in treating patients with mental-somatic multimorbidity, and 4) interprofessional collaboration for handling mental-somatic multimorbidity in hospital settings.The mental-somatic multimorbidities in general hospital patients was found to be relevant among all hospital professionals, although the priority of mental health was higher for nurses than for physicians. This might have resulted from different working environments or in efficient interprofessional collaboration in general hospitals. Physicians and nurses both highlighted the difficulties of dealing with stigma, a lack of knowledge of mental disorders, the emphasis place on treating somatic disorders, and competing priorities and work availability, which all hindered the adequate handling of mental-somatic multimorbidity in general hospitals. CONCLUSION: To support health professionals to integrate mental health into their work, proper environments within general hospitals are needed, such as private rooms in which to communicate with patients. In addition, changes in curriculums and continuing training are needed to improve the understanding of mental-somatic multimorbidities and reduce negative stereotypes. Similarly, interprofessional collaboration between health professionals needs to be strengthened to adequately identify and treat mentally multimorbid patients. A stronger focus should be placed on physicians to improve their competencies in considering patient mental health in their daily somatic treatment care.