Legal Considerations in Emergency Psychiatry.

Emergency psychiatry stands at the fulcrum between the general principles of autonomy and liberty balanced against illnesses that both subvert autonomy and amplify risks for violence and suicide. Although all specialties of medicine must operate in adherence with the law, emergency psychiatry is particularly constrained and guided by state and federal laws. Routine matters of emergency psychiatric care-including involuntary assessment, admission and treatment, management of agitation, medical stabilization and transfer, confidentiality, voluntary and involuntary commitment, and duties to third parties-all occur within carefully delimited legal boundaries, rules, and processes. This article provides a basic overview of critical legal principles relevant to the practice of emergency psychiatry.

Safe Spaces: Mitigating Potential Aggression in Acute Care Psychiatry.

Awareness of potential aggression and violence is crucial when treating patients experiencing mental health crises in psychiatric emergency and inpatient settings. To provide a practical overview for health care workers in acute care psychiatry, the authors summarize relevant literature and clinical considerations on this important topic. Clinical contexts of violence in these settings, possible impact on patients and staff, and approaches to mitigating risk are reviewed. Considerations for early identification of at-risk patients and situations, and nonpharmacological and pharmacological interventions, are highlighted. The authors conclude with key points and future scholarly and practical directions that may further assist those entrusted with providing psychiatric care in these situations. Although working in these often high-paced, high-pressured settings can be challenging, effective violence-management strategies and tools can help staff optimize the focus on patient care while maintaining safety, their own well-being, and overall workplace satisfaction.

Revisiting "Excited Delirium": Does the Diagnosis Reflect and Promote Racial Bias?

INTRODUCTION: "Excited delirium" (ExD) is purported to represent a certain type of agitated state that can lead to unexpected death. The 2009 "White Paper Report on Excited Delirium Syndrome," authored by the American College of Emergency Medicine (ACEP) Excited Delirium Task Force, continues to play a pivotal role in defining ExD. Since that report was produced, there has been an increasing appreciation that the label has been applied more often to Black people. METHODS: Our aim was to analyze the language of the 2009 report, the role of potential stereotypes, and the mechanisms that may potentially encourage bias. RESULTS: Our evaluation of the diagnostic criteria for ExD proposed in the 2009 report shows that it relies on persistent racial stereotypes: eg, unusual strength, decreased sensitivity to pain, and bizarre behavior. Research indicates that use of such stereotypes could encourage biased diagnosis and treatment. CONCLUSION: We suggest that the emergency medicine community avoid use of the concept ExD and that ACEP withdraw implicit or explicit support of the report.

Consensus-Driven Priorities for Firearm Injury Education Among Medical Professionals.

PURPOSE: Firearm injury is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. However, many medical professionals currently receive minimal or no education on firearm injury or its prevention. The authors sought to convene a diverse group of national experts in firearm injury epidemiology, injury prevention, and medical education to develop consensus on priorities to inform the creation of learning objectives and curricula for firearm injury education for medical professionals. METHOD: In 2019, the authors convened an advisory group that was geographically, demographically, and professionally diverse, composed of 33 clinicians, researchers, and educators from across the United States. They used the nominal group technique to achieve consensus on priorities for health professions education on firearm injury. The process involved an initial idea-generating phase, followed by a round-robin sharing of ideas and further idea generation, facilitated discussion and clarification, and the ranking of ideas to generate a prioritized list. RESULTS: This report provides the first national consensus guidelines on firearm injury education for medical professionals. These priorities include a set of crosscutting, basic, and advanced learning objectives applicable to all contexts of firearm injury and all medical disciplines, specialties, and levels of training. They focus on 7 contextual categories that had previously been identified in the literature: 1 category of general priorities applicable to all contexts and 6 categories of specific contexts, including intimate partner violence, mass violence, officer-involved shootings, peer (nonpartner) violence, suicide, and unintentional injury. CONCLUSIONS: Robust, data- and consensus-driven priorities for health professions education on firearm injury create a pathway to clinician competence and self-efficacy. With an improved foundation for curriculum development and educational program-building, clinicians will be better informed to engage in a host of firearm injury prevention initiatives both at the bedside and in their communities.

Mental Health Care of Detained Youth Within Juvenile Detention Facilities.

Mental health treatment of juvenile offenders and undocumented immigrant youth in detention provides a unique opportunity for treatment providers. Although the work may be challenging, the clinical needs and opportunities for early and meaningful interventions are significant. One of the best clinical experiences a psychiatrist can have is working with extremely high-risk youth to help them find safer and better developmental pathways. Few settings can offer such an opportunity to leverage clinical skills to improve the lives and futures of children and adolescents as are afforded to those professionals lucky enough to work in juvenile justice settings.

Evaluating threats of mass shootings in the psychiatric setting.

Psychiatrists may encounter patients at risk of perpetrating mass shootings or other mass violence in various settings. Most people who threaten or perpetrate mass violence are not driven by psychiatric symptoms; however, psychiatrists may be called upon to evaluate the role of mental illness plays in the risk or threat, and to treat psychiatric symptoms when present. Regardless of whether psychiatric treatment is likely to reduce symptoms or the potential for violence, the psychiatrist should collaborate closely with law enforcement, potential targets, and other agencies involved to mitigate risk. Such communications are governed by various privacy laws and duties to third parties. Additional measures, like protective orders, may be a means of restricting the subject's access to firearms.

American Association for Emergency Psychiatry Recommendations to Address Psychiatric Staff Shortages in Emergency Settings.

OBJECTIVE: The psychological sequelae of the COVID-19 crisis will increase demands for psychiatric care in already strained emergency and mental health systems. To address the shortage of psychiatrists (and nurse practitioners and physician assistants) in emergency settings (ESs), the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry (AAEP) has established recommendations for utilizing nonprescribing mental health professionals in the evaluation and management of psychiatric patients in these contexts. METHODS: Faced with limited research on the roles and competencies of nonprescribing psychiatric emergency clinicians (PECs), a multidisciplinary committee of members of AAEP was tasked with developing recommendations for use of PECs. RESULTS: The committee developed eight recommendations regarding the role of PECs in evaluation and management of patients who present to ESs with behavioral emergencies. PECs should have the following competencies: conducting independent psychiatric and substance abuse evaluations; managing behavioral emergencies; aiding in the recognition of confounding medical illnesses, intoxication and withdrawal states, and adverse drug reactions; developing appropriate treatment plans; recognizing when consultation from a psychiatrist or emergency physician is indicated; possessing self-awareness and recognizing clinician-patient dynamics; understanding medicolegal issues, such as involuntary holds and decision-making capacity; and collaborating with clinical teams in ESs. PECs are not meant to replace psychiatrists but to extend the psychiatrist's reach. Use of PECs has already been implemented in some areas of the country. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the AAEP recommendations, ESs can address staffing shortages while ensuring safe management of patients with behavioral emergencies. With appropriate orientation and training, the PEC can serve effectively and competently in an ES.

Management of Agitation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has radically altered delivery of care in emergency settings. Unprecedented hardship due to ongoing fears of exposure and threats to personal safety, along with societal measures enacted to curb disease transmission, have had broad psychosocial impact on patients and healthcare workers alike. These changes can significantly affect diagnosing and managing behavioral emergencies such as agitation in the emergency department. On behalf of the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry, we highlight unique considerations for patients with severe behavioral symptoms and staff members managing symptoms of agitation during COVID-19. Early detection and treatment of agitation, precautions to minimize staff hazards, coordination with security personnel and psychiatric services, and avoidance of coercive strategies that cause respiratory depression will help mitigate heightened risks to safety caused by this outbreak.

Emergency Medicine Research Priorities for Early Intervention for Substance Use Disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) frequently seek emergency care, and the emergency department (ED) may be their only point of contact with the healthcare system. While the ED visit has been increasingly recognized as providing opportunity for interventions around substance use, many questions remain. METHODS: In December 2016 the Coalition on Psychiatric Emergencies (CPE) convened the first Research Consensus Conference on Acute Mental Illness, which consisted of clinical researchers, clinicians from emergency medicine, emergency psychiatry, emergency psychology, representatives from governmental agencies and patient advocacy groups. Background literature review was conducted prior to the meeting, and questions were iteratively focused, revised, voted on and ranked by perceived importance using nominal group method. RESULTS: The main goal of the SUD workgroup was to identify research priorities and develop a research agenda to improve the early identification of and management of emergency department (ED) patients with SUDs with the goal of improving outcomes. This article is the product of a breakout session on "Special Populations: Substance Use Disorder." The workgroup identified with high consensus six research priorities for their importance related to the care of ED patients with SUDs in these overall domains: screening; ED interventions; the role of peer navigators; initiation of SUD management in the ED; specific patient populations that may impact the effectiveness of interventions including sociogenerational and cultural factors; and the management of the acutely intoxicated patient. CONCLUSION: Emergency providers are increasingly recognizing the important role of the ED in reducing adverse outcomes associated with untreated SUDs. Additional research is required to close identified knowledge gaps and improve care of ED patients with SUD.

The Link Between Mental Illness and Firearm Violence: Implications for Social Policy and Clinical Practice.

The United States has substantially higher levels of firearm violence than most other developed countries. Firearm violence is a significant and preventable public health crisis. Mental illness is a weak risk factor for violence despite popular misconceptions reflected in the media and policy. That said, mental health professionals play a critical role in assessing their patients for violence risk, counseling about firearm safety, and guiding the creation of rational and evidence-based public policy that can be effective in mitigating violence risk without unnecessarily stigmatizing people with mental illness. This article summarizes existing evidence about the interplay among mental illness, violence, and firearms, with particular attention paid to the role of active symptoms, addiction, victimization, and psychosocial risk factors. The social and legal context of firearm ownership is discussed as a preface to exploring practical, evidence-driven, and behaviorally informed policy recommendations for mitigating firearm violence risk.

Violence in the Emergency Department.

Violence is common in the emergency department (ED). The ED setting has numerous environmental risk factors for violence, including poor staffing, lack of privacy, overcrowding, and ready availability of nonsecured equipment that can be used as weapons. Strategies can be taken to mitigate the risk of violence toward health care workers, including staff training, changes to the ED layout, appropriate use of security, and policy-level changes. Health care providers in the ED should be familiar with local case law and standards related to the duty to warn third parties when a violent threat is made by a patient.

Mental Health Care of Detained Youth and Solitary Confinement and Restraint Within Juvenile Detention Facilities.

Justice-involved youth are a complex and heterogeneous population with extremely high rates of mental disorder, trauma, and numerous other psychosocial stressors. Although working with this population has several challenges it can be highly rewarding for clinicians and a powerful opportunity for prevention of subsequent problems. Psychosocial interventions remain some of the most robust and effective interventions targeting specific developmental deficits common in this population. Medication treatment is also often appropriate. Seclusion may be clinically appropriate in some cases and is seen as distinct from disciplinary interventions such as isolation or solitary confinement, which are generally not appropriate.