Current practices for mental health follow-up after psychiatric emergency department/psychiatric emergency service visits: a national survey of academic emergency departments
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Authors
Boudreaux, Edwin D.Niro, Kathryn
Sullivan, Ashley F.
Rosenbaum, Christopher D.
Allen, Michael H.
Camargo, Carlos A. Jr.
Student Authors
Kathryn NiroDocument Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2011-11-30Keywords
Academic Medical CentersContinuity of Patient Care
Emergency Services, Psychiatric
Health Care Surveys
Humans
Mental Disorders
United States
Emergency Medicine
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to describe continuity of care approaches for psychiatric emergencies in the emergency department. METHODS: A national survey of all 138 academic emergency departments in the United States was conducted. RESULTS: Most emergency physicians (81%) had no systematic method for identifying psychiatric emergency patients with high recidivism. In order to promote outpatient care, sites commonly reported using intensive interventions, including scheduling outpatient appointments prior to discharge (72%) and in-house case management (64%). CONCLUSION: While systematic identification of repeat psychiatric emergency patients was uncommon, emergency departments reported using a variety of fairly intensive strategies to promote continuity of care with outpatient mental health services.Source
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2011 Nov-Dec;33(6):631-3. Epub 2011 Aug 27. Link to article on publisher's siteDOI
10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2011.05.020Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/28521PubMed ID
21872940Related Resources
Link to Article in PubMedae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2011.05.020
Scopus Count
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Funding global emergency medicine research-from seed grants to NIH supportHansoti, Bhakti; Levine, Adam; Ganti, Latha; Oteng, Rockefeller; DesRosiers, Taylor; Modi, Payal; Brown, Jeremy (2016-12-01)BACKGROUND: Funding for global health has grown significantly over the past two decades. Numerous funding opportunities for international development and research work exist; however, they can be difficult to navigate. The 2013 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference on global health and emergency care identified the need to strengthen global emergency care research funding, solidify existing funding streams, and expand funding sources. RESULTS: This piece focuses on the various federal funding opportunities available to support emergency physicians conducting international research from seed funding to large institutional grants. In particular, we focus on the application and review processes for the Fulbright and Fogarty programs, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Career development awards, and the Medical Education Partnership Initiative (MEPI), including tips and pathways through each application process. CONCLUSIONS: Lastly, the paper provides an index that may be used as a guide in determining whether the amount of funding provided by a grant is worth the effort in applying.
-
Screening for Suicidal Ideation and Attempts Among Emergency Department Medical Patients: Instrument and Results from the Psychiatric Emergency Research CollaborationAllen, Michael H.; Abar, Beau W.; McCormick, Mark; Barnes, Donna H.; Haukoos, Jason; Garmel, Gus M.; Boudreaux, Edwin D. (2013-06-01)Joint Commission National Patient Safety Goal 15 calls for organizations "to identify patients at risk for suicide." Overt suicidal behavior accounts for 0.6% of emergency department (ED) visits, but incidental suicidal ideation is found in 3%-11.6%. This is the first multicenter study of suicide screening in EDs. Of 2,243 patients in six diverse emergency settings, 1,068 (47.7%) were screened with a brief instrument. Depression was endorsed by 369 (34.5%); passive suicidal ideation by 79 (7.3%); and active suicidal ideation by 24 (2.3%). One hundred thirty-seven (12.8%) reported prior attempts, including 35 (3.3%) with current suicidal ideation. Almost half of those with current ideation had a prior attempt (43.8%) versus those without current ideation, 10.3%, chi(2) (1) = 75.59, p < .001. Twenty cases (25%) were admitted to medical services, but only 10 (12.5%) received mental health assessment; none were admitted directly to a psychiatry service. The prevalence of suicidal ideation here is similar to previous studies but the frequency of prior attempts has not been reported. The 35 cases with current ideation and prior attempt are at risk. As they did not present psychiatrically, they would likely have gone undetected. Despite reporting these cases to clinical staff, few received risk assessment.
-
Lethal Means Restriction for Suicide Prevention: Beliefs and Behaviors of Emergency Department ProvidersBetz, Marian E.; Miller, Matthew; Barber, Catherine; Miller, Ivan; Sullivan, Ashley F.; Camargo, Carlos A. Jr.; Boudreaux, Edwin D.; Boyer, Edward W.; Clark, Robin E.; Coleman, Mardia A.; et al. (2013-10-01)BACKGROUND: We sought to examine the beliefs and behaviors of emergency department (ED) providers related to preventing suicide by reducing suicidal patients' access to lethal methods (means restriction) and identify characteristics associated with asking patients about firearm access. METHODS: Physicians and nurses at eight EDs completed a confidential, voluntary survey. RESULTS: The response rate was 79% (n = 631); 57% of respondents were females and 49% were nurses. Less than half believed, "most" or "all" suicides are preventable. More nurses (67%) than physicians (44%) thought "most" or "all" firearm suicide decedents would have died by another method had a firearm been unavailable (P < .001). The proportion of providers who reported they "almost always" ask suicidal patients about firearm access varied across five patient scenarios: suicidal with firearm suicide plan (64%), suicidal with no suicide plan (22%), suicidal with nonfirearm plan (21%), suicidal in past month but not today (16%), and overdosed but no longer suicidal (9%). In multivariable logistic regression, physicians were more likely than nurses to "almost always" or "often" ask about a firearm across all five scenarios, as were older providers and those who believed their own provider type was responsible for assessing firearm access. CONCLUSIONS: Many ED providers are skeptical about the preventability of suicide and the effectiveness of means restriction, and most do not assess suicidal patients' firearm access except when a patient has a firearm suicide plan. These findings suggest the need for targeted staff education concerning means restriction for suicide prevention.