Prevention of psychosocial distress consequences in somatic hospital inpatients via a stepped and collaborative care model: protocol of SomPsyNet, a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 30% of somatic hospital inpatients experience psychosocial distress, contributing to increased (re-)hospitalisation rates, treatment resistance, morbidity, and direct and indirect costs. However, such distress often remains unrecognised and unaddressed. We established 'SomPsyNet', a 'stepped and collaborative care model' (SCCM) for somatic hospital inpatients, aiming at alleviating this issue through early identification of distress and provision of appropriate care, providing problem-focused pathways and strengthening collaborative care. We report the protocol of the 'SomPsyNet' study, aiming to evaluate implementation and impact of the SCCM on distressed patients' health-related quality of life. Secondary objectives include assessing efficacy of the screening procedures, influence of SCCM on other health outcomes and associated costs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our stepped wedge cluster randomised trial conducted at three tertiary hospitals comprises three conditions: treatment as usual (TAU) without screening for distress (phase 0), TAU with screening but without consequences (phase I, main comparator) and TAU with screening and psychosomatic-psychiatric consultations for those distressed (phase II). The time-of-transition between phases I and II was randomised. Sample size target is N=2200-2500 participants, with 6 month follow-up for distressed (anticipated n=640-700) and a subsample of non-distressed (anticipated n=200) patients. Primary outcome is mental health-related quality of life (SF-36 'Mental Health Component Summary score'); secondary outcomes include psychosocial distress, anxiety, depressive and somatic symptoms, symptom burden and distress, resilience, social support and qualitative of life, assessed by internationally accepted instruments, with good psychometric properties. Further, health claims data will be used to assess SCCM's impact on direct and indirect costs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: SomPsyNet adheres to the Helsinki Declaration and is approved by the 'Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz' (2019-01724). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and communicated to participants, healthcare professionals and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Swiss National Clinical Trials Portal; ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04269005, updated 19.09.2023).

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.