Increasing HIV Testing in Inpatient Psychiatry.

BACKGROUND: People with serious mental illness (SMI) are at elevated risk of HIV infection, but do not receive HIV tests regularly. Inpatient psychiatric admissions provide opportunities for HIV testing. OBJECTIVE: This study retrospectively examined the impact of three sequential interventions designed to increase HIV testing on an acute inpatient psychiatry service: (1) advocacy by an administrative champion, (2) an on-site HIV counselor, and (3) a clinician championing HIV testing. METHOD: Demographic and HIV testing data were extracted from hospital data systems for 11,360 admissions of HIV-negative patients to an inpatient psychiatry service between 2006 and 2012. Relationships among interventions, length of stay, patient demographics, and receipt of an HIV test were examined using general estimating equation methods. RESULTS: In the year prior to the intervention, 7.2% of psychiatric inpatients received HIV tests. After 1 year of administrative advocacy, 11.2% received tests. Following the HIV counseling intervention, 25.1% of patients were tested. After the counseling intervention ended, continued administrative and clinical advocacy was associated with further increases in testing. In the final year studied, 30.3% of patients received HIV tests. Patients with shorter inpatient stays and those of Black or Asian race/ethnicity were less likely to be tested. Further, 1.6% of HIV tests were positive. CONCLUSION: Three interventions of varying intensity were associated with a 5-fold increase in HIV testing on an acute inpatient psychiatry service. Nonetheless, 70% of inpatients were not tested. Continued efforts are needed to increase HIV testing in inpatient psychiatric settings.

Impact of capacity reductions in acute public-sector inpatient psychiatric services.

OBJECTIVE: This study tested the hypothesis that reductions in acute public-sector psychiatric inpatient capacity in a major urban area would be associated with negative impacts on patients and the community. METHODS: The impact of two discrete service changes that reduced acute inpatient capacity by 50% in a single public-sector general hospital setting was examined. Indicators of impact were obtained from existing administrative databases for a 33-month period. Indicators included measures of utilization and case mix on the acute inpatient and psychiatric emergency services, suicides among community mental health clients, and psychiatric evaluations conducted in county jails. RESULTS: Reductions in inpatient capacity were not associated with hypothesized negative impacts, such as increased demand for psychiatric emergency services, decreased access to emergency or inpatient services, or increased recidivism to inpatient care. Similarly, neither the number of suicides among community mental health clients nor the number of jail psychiatric evaluations increased after capacity reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Data from a single urban public-sector setting suggest that acute inpatient psychiatric capacity may be reduced without negative impacts on patients or the community. In this setting, collaboration between inpatient and outpatient providers to speed discharge facilitated reductions in inpatient length of stay that made it possible to serve the same number of patients with fewer resources. Other service system adjustments may be more appropriate in other settings, and alternative approaches to reducing utilization of high-cost inpatient care warrant examination.