Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBoudreaux, Edwin D.
dc.contributor.authorAllen, Michael H.
dc.contributor.authorClaassen, Cindy
dc.contributor.authorCurrier, Glenn W.
dc.contributor.authorCalifornia Pacific Medical Center
dc.contributor.authorGlick, Rachel
dc.contributor.authorPark, Jennifer
dc.contributor.authorFeifel, David
dc.contributor.authorCamargo, Carlos A. Jr.
dc.date2022-08-11T08:08:17.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T15:49:48Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T15:49:48Z
dc.date.issued2009-11-07
dc.date.submitted2011-06-28
dc.identifier.citationGen Hosp Psychiatry. 2009 Nov-Dec;31(6):515-22. Epub 2009 Jun 4. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2009.04.009">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn0163-8343 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2009.04.009
dc.identifier.pmid19892209
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/28519
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: To describe the Psychiatric Emergency Research Collaboration (PERC), the methods used to create a structured chart review tool and the results of our multicenter study. METHOD: Members of the PERC Steering Committee created a structured chart review tool designed to provide a comprehensive picture of the assessment and management of psychiatric emergency patients. Ten primary indicators were chosen based on the Steering Committee's professional experience, the published literature and existing consensus panel guidelines. Eight emergency departments completed data abstraction of 50 randomly selected emergency psychiatric patients, with seven providing data from two independent raters. Inter-rater reliability (Kappas) and descriptive statistics were computed. RESULTS: Four hundred patient charts were abstracted. Initial concordance between raters was variable, with some sites achieving high agreement and others not. Reconciliation of discordant ratings through re-review of the original source documentation was necessary for four of the sites. Two hundred eighty-five (71%) subjects had some form of laboratory test performed, including 212 (53%) who had urine toxicology screening and 163 (41%) who had blood alcohol levels drawn. Agitation was present in 220 (52%), with 98 (25%) receiving a medication to reduce agitation and 22 (6%) being physically restrained. Self-harm ideation was present in 226 (55%), while other-harm ideation was present in 82 (20%). One hundred seventy-nine (45%) were admitted to an inpatient or observation unit. CONCLUSION: Creating a common standard for documenting, abstracting and reporting on the nature and management of psychiatric emergencies is feasible across a wide range of health care institutions.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=19892209&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2852101/pdf/nihms186871.pdf
dc.subjectCooperative Behavior
dc.subjectDocumentation
dc.subjectEmergency Services, Psychiatric
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.subjectHospitals, General
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMental Disorders
dc.subjectMental Status Schedule
dc.subjectMulticenter Studies as Topic
dc.subjectQuality Assurance, Health Care
dc.subjectQuality Indicators, Health Care
dc.subjectReference Values
dc.subjectReferral and Consultation
dc.subjectRetrospective Studies
dc.subjectSafety
dc.subjectSelf-Injurious Behavior
dc.subjectSubstance Abuse Detection
dc.subjectTriage
dc.subjectUnited States
dc.subjectEmergency Medicine
dc.titleThe Psychiatric Emergency Research Collaboration-01: methods and results
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleGeneral hospital psychiatry
dc.source.volume31
dc.source.issue6
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/emed_pp/6
dc.identifier.contextkey2078661
html.description.abstract<p>OBJECTIVE: To describe the Psychiatric Emergency Research Collaboration (PERC), the methods used to create a structured chart review tool and the results of our multicenter study.</p> <p>METHOD: Members of the PERC Steering Committee created a structured chart review tool designed to provide a comprehensive picture of the assessment and management of psychiatric emergency patients. Ten primary indicators were chosen based on the Steering Committee's professional experience, the published literature and existing consensus panel guidelines. Eight emergency departments completed data abstraction of 50 randomly selected emergency psychiatric patients, with seven providing data from two independent raters. Inter-rater reliability (Kappas) and descriptive statistics were computed.</p> <p>RESULTS: Four hundred patient charts were abstracted. Initial concordance between raters was variable, with some sites achieving high agreement and others not. Reconciliation of discordant ratings through re-review of the original source documentation was necessary for four of the sites. Two hundred eighty-five (71%) subjects had some form of laboratory test performed, including 212 (53%) who had urine toxicology screening and 163 (41%) who had blood alcohol levels drawn. Agitation was present in 220 (52%), with 98 (25%) receiving a medication to reduce agitation and 22 (6%) being physically restrained. Self-harm ideation was present in 226 (55%), while other-harm ideation was present in 82 (20%). One hundred seventy-nine (45%) were admitted to an inpatient or observation unit.</p> <p>CONCLUSION: Creating a common standard for documenting, abstracting and reporting on the nature and management of psychiatric emergencies is feasible across a wide range of health care institutions.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathemed_pp/6
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Emergency Medicine
dc.source.pages515-22


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record