No abstract

People living with serious mental illness (SMI) experience physical health complications at disproportionate rates to people without an SMI. Unhealthy dietary intake and disordered eating behaviors are key driving factors. There is a lack of valid nutrition-risk screening tools targeted to mental health services, and typically used nutrition-risk screening tools are not suitable for mental health services. This paper details the rationale and study protocol for development and validation of the NutriMental screener, a tool for use in clinical practice to identify service users who are at risk for common nutrition issues experienced by this population group and trigger referral to a specialist clinician. The development process includes five phases. Phase I is the development of nutrition-related domains of interest from screening tools used in mental health services. Phase II involves a literature review and service-user interviews to identify additional domains. Phase III consists of international workshops with relevant clinicians and persons with SMI to gain a consensus on questions to be included in the draft tool. Phase IV involves conducting multinational feasibility and preliminary validation studies. Phase V consists of performing formal validation studies. The development of a nutrition-risk screening tool for mental health services is a necessary step to help rectify the physical-health disparities and life-expectancy gap for people with SMI.

Psychiatric emergencies occur frequently in the community setting, e.g. the patient’s home or public places. Little is known about the characteristics and outcome of these situations. This study describes psychiatric emergencies in the canton of Zurich, Switzerland, and examines determinants of their outcome. We retrospectively analyzed 620 medical records of consultations classified as psychiatric emergencies of a 24/7 service of community-based emergency physicians. Information on sociodemographic, clinical and situational factors was extracted. The observation period was 6 months in 2017. Binary logistic regression was used to examine predictors for involuntary admissions. Most emergency consultations (64.5%) took place at the patient’s home, followed by police stations (31.0%), public places (3.2%), and somatic hospitals (1.3%). Patient characteristics and reasons for consultation varied considerably between the locations. The first involved person was commonly a relative. Of all consultations, 38.4% resulted in involuntary admissions, mainly in patients with psychosis, suicidality, aggression, refusal of necessary treatment and previous involuntary admissions. Situation-related factors and the involvement of relatives were no significant predictors of the outcome. Psychiatric emergencies occur in different places and in patients with a variety of psychiatric symptoms. Although half of the emergency situations were resolved in the community, the rate of involuntary admissions was still high. For additional reduction, the further development of quickly available alternatives to psychiatric inpatient treatment is required. These should be specifically geared towards acute situations in patients with the described risk factors. Additionally, the role of relatives during psychiatric emergencies should be further studied.

No abstract

Introduction: Involuntary admissions to psychiatric hospitals, regardless of their beneficial effects, violate the patients' autonomy. To keep such measures at a minimum and develop less restricting and coercive alternatives, a better understanding of the psychiatric emergency situations which end up in involuntary admissions is needed. This descriptive and exploratory study investigates the consultations leading to involuntary admission and the decision-making process of the referring physicians.Methods: We developed an online questionnaire to collect data on the characteristics of the consultation leading to an involuntary admission, including influencing factors from the referring physicians‘ perspective, as well as their professional background. We included 107 physicians who completed the questionnaire after they had referred patients for involuntary admission to one major psychiatric hospital in Switzerland.Results: The referring physicians were heterogeneous regarding their medical background and experience with psychiatric emergency situations. The consultations were time consuming and took place in various locations. Clinical findings, third-party anamnesis and a known psychiatric diagnosis contributed strongest to the decision to admit involuntarily. “Protection from danger to self” was named most frequently as purpose of the admission.Discussion: This study emphasizes the variety of psychiatric emergency situations leading to involuntary admissions. In most cases, several parties are involved and influence the decision together with medical and social factors. To reduce the number of involuntary admissions, alternatives for patients with a high symptom load and at risk of harming themselves are needed. Possible approaches to achieve that reduction and recommendations for further research are provided.