In this qualitative study, the experiences of persons who frequently visit the emergency department (ED) for mental health-related reasons were explored. Interpretive Description guided the design, and data were collected through interviews with 10 adults who made 12+ ED visits within a 1-year time frame (2015). Thematic analysis was used to analyze data inductively. The participants' experiences were described with the help of three themes emerging from the data: The Experience, The Providers, and Protective Factors. The participants felt compelled to come to hospital. For them, every visit was necessary, and dismissal of their needs by staff was interpreted as disrespect and prejudice. We noted differences in ED utilization patterns according to psychiatric diagnosis, and more research is needed to explore the phenomenon of frequent use by particular patient populations. Furthermore, health care providers implementing interventions designed to improve emergency care should consider tailored approaches rather than a one-size-fits-all strategy.
The research findings are discussed in light of current literature and implications for practice.
The UCC model of care contributed to improved access to psychiatric evaluation and short-term treatment. This inter-professional model could be applied to other health care settings to meet the needs of patients requiring acute psychiatric services.
Background Healthcare resources are limited and unnecessary, and inappropriate emergency department use is now a highly visible healthcare priority. Individuals visiting the emergency department for mental health-related reasons are often amongst the most frequent presenters. In response, researchers and clinicians have created interventions to streamline emergency department use and several primary studies describe the effects of these interventions. Yet, no consensus exists on the optimal approach, and information on the quality of development, effectiveness, acceptability, and economic considerations is hard to find. The purpose of this study is to systematically review interventions designed to improve appropriate use of the emergency department for mental health reasons. Method A mixed-method systematic review using Joanna Briggs Methodology. Search combining electronic databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, PROQUEST, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health) and secondary searches (grey literature and hand search with consultation). Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts using predetermined eligibility criteria and a third reviewer will resolve conflicts. Full texts will also be screened by two independent reviews and conflicts resolved in a consensus meeting with a third reviewer. A pilot-tested data extraction form will be used to retrieve data relevant to the study objectives. We will assess the quality and of all included studies. Data describing interventions will be summarized using logic models and reported narratively. Quality of development will be assessed using the Oxford Implementation Index. For data on intervention effectiveness, we will assess statistical heterogeneity and conduct a meta-analysis using a random effects method, if appropriate. For interventions that cannot be pooled, we will report outcomes narratively and descriptively. Qualitative data on acceptability will be synthesized using meta-aggregation and an economic evaluation of interventions will be done. The reporting of this protocol follows the PRISMA-P statement. Discussion Using a combined systematic review methodology and integrated knowledge translation plan, the project will provide decision makers with concrete evidence to support the implementation and evaluation of interventions to improve emergency department use for mental health reasons. These interventions reflect widespread priorities in the area of mental health care. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018087430
This period of heightened access demands that the public health community seize the moment to increase awareness about and promote the female condom among health care professionals and consumers. The pending repeal of the ACA may thwart important gains in access; policies promoting women's reproductive health must be implemented immediately.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.