Two clinicians for one patient, is it worth it? Patients' perspective on receiving treatment from a pair of clinicians, in a psychiatric emergency and crisis unit.

BACKGROUND: In the field of psychiatric crisis interventions, treatment is commonly provided by multidisciplinary teams in Western countries. However, empirical data on the processes involved in this type of intervention are lacking, in particular from a patient perspective. Our study aims to gain a better understanding of the patients' experience of a treatment setting provided by a pair of clinicians in a psychiatric emergency and crisis intervention unit. Patients' perspective could provide a broader understanding of its advantages (or disadvantages), as well as bring new insight on elements influencing patients' treatment adherence. METHODS: We conducted 12 interviews with former patients treated by a pair of clinicians. The participants' experience, explored with semi-structured questions on their views of the treatment setting, was analyzed by means of thematic analysis using an inductive approach. RESULTS: The majority of participants experienced this setting as advantageous. A broader comprehension of their issues is the benefit most often expressed. A minority experienced seeing two clinicians as disadvantageous (having to talk to several clinicians at a time, change interlocutors, repeat one's story). Participants attributed joint sessions (with both clinicians) mainly to clinical reasons and separate sessions (with one clinician at a time) mainly to logistical ones. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study provides first insights into patients' experience of a setting including two clinicians providing emergency and crisis psychiatric care. The results show a perceived clinical gain of such a treatment setting for highly in crisis patients. However, further research is needed to evaluate the benefit of this setting, including the indication for joint or separate sessions as the patient's clinical course evolves.

When to discharge and when to voluntary or compulsory hospitalize? Factors associated with treatment decision after self-harm.

Clinicians assessing suicidal patients in emergency departments (EDs) must decide whether to admit the person to a psychiatric ward with voluntary or compulsory hospitalization or to discharge him/her as an outpatient. This cross-sectional study aimed to identify independent predictors of this decision among a large sample of self-harm (SH) patients. It used data from all patients admitted to four Swiss EDs between 2016 and 2019. Socio-demographic, clinical, and suicidal process-related characteristics data were evaluated against the decision for voluntary or compulsory hospitalization using t-tests, Chi-Square tests and logistic multiple regression. 2142 episodes from 1832 unique patients were evaluated. Independent predictors of decision to hospitalize included: male gender, advanced age, hospital location, depression and personality disorders, substance use, a difficult socio-economic condition, a clear intent to die, and a serious suicide attempt. Significant variables that emerged as independent predictors of compulsory hospitalization were hospital location, not having anxiety and personality disorders, being retired, having a clear intent to die, and making a serious suicide attempt. Hospital EDs had different rates of compulsory psychiatric admission. However, the decision to admit a patient for hospitalization, either voluntary or compulsory, was mainly based on clinical factors.

Observational study of suicide in Switzerland: comparison between psychiatric in- and outpatients.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: In Switzerland, suicide is a major cause of years of potential life lost. Among people who died by suicide, a significant number suffered from mental illness and were treated by psychiatric care institutions. Psychiatric patients are thus a specific target for suicide prevention. Based on data from a clinical committee reviewing every death by suicide of psychiatric patients in the Canton of Vaud (Switzerland), this observational study aimed to gain knowledge on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of psychiatric patients who died by suicide by comparing in- and outpatients. METHODS: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients who died by suicide in our department from January 2007 to December 2019 were analysed. In- and outpatients were compared. RESULTS: The sample included 153 patients (64.7% males, n = 99). Three quarters (76.4%, n = 81) of the patients had at least one previous suicide attempt. In- and outpatients did not differ significantly in terms of sociodemographics data, psychiatric diagnosis or method of suicide. Almost all (97.2%) of the outpatients had at least one past psychiatric hospitalisation. We found gender disparities for several variables and a lower male/female suicide ratio than in the general Swiss population. Seventy-two percent of the outpatients (n = 49) had a last personal contact with clinicians less than a week before their suicide and 38.8 % of those less than 24 hours (28% of outpatients, n = 19). CONCLUSIONS: Patients dying by suicide present most of the time a serious psychiatric history. In- and outpatients seem to have a similar clinical and sociodemographic profile and suicide prevention should thus not be addressed differently in these two groups. The time between death of outpatients and last contact with a therapist was shorter than expected.

Patients with first versus multiple episodes of self-harm: how do their profiles differ?

BACKGROUND: Self-harm (SH) is among the strongest predictors of further episodes of SH, suicide attempt, and death by suicide. People who repeteadly harm themselves are at even higher risk for suicide. Factors influencing the repetition are important to identify when assessing suicidal risk and thereafter to offer specific interventions. Therefore, this study aimed to compare first versus multiple episodes characteristics in a large sample of patients in french-speaking Switzerland. METHOD: We used the database from the French-speaking Swiss program for monitoring SH. Data of the psychiatric assessment of all adults admitted for SH were collected in the emergency department of four Swiss city hospitals between December 2016 and October 2019. RESULTS: 1730 episodes of SH were included. Several variables were significantly associated with multiple episodes, including diagnosis (over representation of personality disorders and under representation of anxiety disorders), professional activity (Invalidity insurance more frequent) and prior psychiatry care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients suffering from a personality disorder and those with invalidity insurance are at risk for multiple episodes of SH and should be targeted with specific interventions.

Patient perspectives on an intervention after suicide attempt: The need for patient centred and individualized care.

BACKGROUND: Many types of intervention exist for suicide attempters, but they tend not to sufficiently consider patient's views. AIM: To identify useful components of a previously evaluated intervention after a suicide attempt from the patient's views and to better understand the process of recovery. METHOD: Forty-one interviews with suicide attempters were qualitatively analysed. Views of participants (i) on the components of the intervention (nurse case-management, joint crisis plan, meetings with relatives/network and follow-up calls) and (ii) their recovery were explored. The material was analysed by means of thematic analysis with a deductive-inductive approach. RESULTS: Participants valued the human and professional qualities of the nurse case-manager, and appreciated follow-up calls and meetings. However, their views diverged regarding for instance frequency of phone calls, or disclosing information or lack thereof. Interpersonal relationship, suicide attempters' own resources and life changes emerged as core recovery factors. DISCUSSION: The study highlights the figure of an engaged clinician, with both professional and human commitment, aware that some suicide attempters put more emphasis on their own resources than on delivered health care. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions should consider the clinician as the cornerstone of the tailored care valued by suicide attempters.

Suicides in Psychiatric Patients: Identifying Health Care-Related Factors through Clinical Practice Reviews.

The objective of this study was to identify health care-related factors associated with death by suicide in psychiatric patients and to gain insight into clinician views on how to deal with suicidality. The study material derived from a clinician committee in a psychiatric department reviewing every outpatient and inpatient suicide in a standardized way. Reports' conclusions and corresponding plenary discussion minutes regarding 94 suicides were analyzed using inductive thematic content analysis. Health care-related factors were categorized into 4 themes: patient evaluation, patient management, clinician training, and involvement of relevant non-clinical partners. Clinician views on the themes were expressed through statements (i) promoting or restricting an aspect of care (here called recommendations), which mainly followed existing guidelines and were consensual and (ii) without precise indication (here called comments), which departed from mainstream opinions or addressed topics not covered by existing policy. Involvement of non-clinical partners emerged as a new key issue for suicide prevention in psychiatric departments and should be openly discussed with patients. Clinicians preferred balanced conclusions when they reviewed suicide cases.

[Meeting suicidal patient†: ongoing actions in French speaking Switzerland]. / Les enjeux de la rencontre avec la personne suicidaire - Apports du Groupe romand prévention suicide (GRPS).

This article describes a model designed by an ad hoc group in French-speaking Switzerland to help professionals meeting suicidal patients. Based on current scientific knowledge, it promotes the clinical encounter with patient rather than a quantitative risk assessment, which may interfere with therapeutic alliance. This model underlines the importance of a reflexive position from the caregiver, who should keep a critical view on his own practice and opinions on suicidal process.

Cet article décrit le modèle d'aide à la rencontre de la personne suicidaire et à l'évaluation du potentiel suicidaire développé par le Groupe Romand Prévention Suicide (GRPS). S'appuyant sur les connaissances scientifiques actuelles, il privilégie la rencontre clinique à l'évaluation, et se distancie des méthodes cherchant à prédire le suicide, qui peuvent entraver la rencontre. Ce modèle valorise un regard curieux de l'intervenant sur sa propre pratique et ses possibles préjugés en lien avec la problématique suicidaire.

[Team supervision in Consultation Liaison psychiatry : thoughts and landmarks]. / Supervision des équipes de soinsen psychiatrie de liaison : quelques points de repère.

Team supervision is an important task in consultation liaison psychiatry. Supervision allows to exchange on a clinical situation with many different objectives that we describe here. The integration of a plurality of views on a situation, as well as the support of caregivers interpersonal skills are among the goals of utmost importance. Based on our experiences in different care settings of a university hospital, we propose some landmarks to guide the caregivers involved in this task renewed with each team encountered.

La supervision d'équipes de soins par les intervenants de psychiatrie de liaison est une tâche importante au sein de l'activité de Consultation et Liaison. La supervision, dans ce qu'elle a d'essentiel, ouvre un espace de parole dont nous allons décrire les objectifs principaux. La mise en commun d'une pluralité de regards sur une situation, ainsi que le soutien des compétences interpersonnelles des soignants, constituent à nos yeux les objectifs prioritaires. Sur la base de nos expériences dans différents lieux de soins d'un hôpital universitaire, nous proposons quelques points de repère pour guider les intervenants qui se mobilisent dans cette tâche dont les contours sont renouvelés avec chaque équipe rencontrée.

The implementation and first insights of the French-speaking Swiss programme for monitoring self-harm.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Self-harm is a major risk factor for suicide but remains poorly documented. No data on self-harm in French-speaking Switzerland exist. To address this deficiency, the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health commissioned a specific self-harm monitoring programme. We present and discuss its implementation and first findings. METHODS: Every patient aged 18–65 years presenting for self-harm to the emergency departments of the Lausanne and Neuchâtel general hospitals were included in the monitoring programme over a 10-month period (December 2016 to September 2017). Clinicians collected anonymous sociodemographic and clinical data. RESULTS: The sample included 490 patients (54.9% female and 45.1% male) for 554 episodes of self-harm, showing a higher proportion of patients aged 18–34 (49.2%) than older age groups (35–49, 33.7% and 50–65, 17.1%). Patients were mostly single (56.1%) and in problematic socioeconomic situations (65.7%). Self-poisoning was the most commonly used method (58.2%) and was preferred by women (71% of females and 42.5% of males, Fisher’s exact test, p <0.001) and the majority of patients (53.3%) had experienced at least one previous episode of self-harm. The self-harm rate was 220 per 100,000 inhabitants in Lausanne and 140 in Neuchâtel. Suicidal intent was clear for 50.6% of the overall sample, unclear for 25.1% and absent for 24.3%. It differed significantly between sites (χ2(2) = 9.068, p = 0.011) as Lausanne reported more incidents of unclear intent (27.7% versus 17.4% in Neuchâtel) and Neuchâtel more incidents with absence of intent (33.1% versus 21.3% in Lausanne). In Lausanne, patients more frequently resorted to methods such as jumping from a height (11.4%) and hanging (9%) than in Neuchâtel (1.6% and 4.9%, Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Our results are globally consistent with previous research on self-harm. We found significant inter-site differences in methods, suicidal intent and self-harm rates. Our findings highlight the importance of implementing local self-harm monitoring to identify specific at-risk groups and develop targeted preventive intervention.

Multicomponent Intervention for Patients Admitted to an Emergency Unit for Suicide Attempt: An Exploratory Study.

Suicide is a major cause of premature deaths worldwide and belongs to the top priority public health issues. While suicide attempt is the most important risk factor for completed suicide, intervention for suicide attempters (SA) have produced mixed results. Since an important proportion of SA request medical care, emergency units (EU) are an opportune setting to implement such interventions. This exploratory study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a multicomponent intervention for SA admitted to an EU. The intervention consisted of coordination by a case manager of a joint crisis plan (JCP), an early meeting with relatives and the existing care network, as well as phone contacts during 3 months after suicide attempt. Among 107 SA admitted to the emergency unit during the study period, 51 could not be included for logistical reason, 22 were excluded, and intervention was offered to 34. Of these, 15 refused the intervention, which was thus piloted with 19 SA. First-time attempters most frequently declined the intervention. Feasibility and acceptability of phone contacts and case manager were good, while JCPs and meetings were difficult to implement and perceived as less acceptable. Refusal pattern questions the global acceptability and is discussed: JCPs and meetings will have to be modified in order to improve their feasibility and acceptability, especially among first-time attempters.

Prevention of major depression in complex medically ill patients: preliminary results from a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Depression is highly prevalent in patients with physical illness and is associated with a diminished quality of life and poorer medical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluated whether a multifaceted intervention conducted by a psychiatric consultation-liaison nurse could reduce the incidence of major depression in rheumatology inpatients and diabetes outpatients with a high level of case complexity. METHOD: Of 247 randomized patients, the authors identified 100 patients with a high level of case complexity at baseline and without major depression (65 rheumatology and 35 diabetes patients). Patients were randomized to usual care (N=53) or to a nurse-led intervention (N=47). Main outcomes were the incidence of major depression and severity of depressive symptoms during a 1-year follow-up, based on quarterly assessments with standardized psychiatric interviews. RESULTS: The incidence of major depression was 63% in usual-care patients and 36% in the intervention group. Effects of intervention on depressive symptoms were observed in outpatients with diabetes but not in rheumatology inpatients. CONCLUSION: These preliminary results based on subgroup analysis suggest that a multifaceted nurse-led intervention may prevent the occurrence of major depression in complex medically ill patients and reduce depressive symptoms in diabetes outpatients.