Bruffaerts Ronny, Sabbe Marc, Demyttenaere Koen
Dept. of Psychiatry, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2005 Oct;40(10):829-34. doi: 10.1007/s00127-005-0959-x. Epub 2005 Sep 22.
Aftercare dispositions in psychiatric emergencies have often been limited to the classic armamentarium of admission vs nonadmission. It is unknown to what extent there are differences in predicting follow-up after psychiatric emergency room (PER) visits when focusing on a broader scope of aftercare possibilities.
This observational study describes and predicts aftercare dispositions after a psychiatric emergency referral: admission, onsite short-term crisis-intervention program (CIP), refusal of any aftercare, and outpatient aftercare. From March 2000 until March 2002, PER patients (N=3,719) of the university hospital were monitored regarding sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and use of health services.
Forty-four percent were admitted, 38% were referred to outpatient treatment, 9% refused any aftercare, and the remainder was referred to the CIP. Psychotic patients were most likely to be admitted [odds ratios (ORs) between 5.98 and 6.52], followed by patients with suicidal symptoms (OR=2.25) and those who reported outpatient service utilization (OR=1.43). Young patients (OR=3.36) or those with anxiety disorders (OR=2.03) were most likely to be referred for outpatient aftercare. Patients diagnosed with a personality disorder were at highest risk of refusing any aftercare (OR=1.81).
Despite the existence of a short-term onsite CIP, the majority of the patients were admitted after PER referral. We assume that the existence of this program decreased the number of patients who otherwise would refuse all aftercare. More research is needed in order to explain aftercare dispositions more appropriately.
精神科急诊的后续处置方式通常局限于传统的入院或非入院手段。当关注更广泛的后续护理可能性时,在预测精神科急诊室(PER)就诊后的随访情况方面,差异程度尚不清楚。
这项观察性研究描述并预测了精神科急诊转诊后的后续处置方式:入院、现场短期危机干预项目(CIP)、拒绝任何后续护理以及门诊后续护理。从2000年3月至2002年3月,对大学医院的PER患者(N = 3719)的社会人口统计学和临床特征以及医疗服务使用情况进行了监测。
44%的患者入院,38%的患者被转诊至门诊治疗,9%的患者拒绝任何后续护理,其余患者被转诊至CIP。精神病患者最有可能入院[优势比(OR)在5.98至6.52之间],其次是有自杀症状的患者(OR = 2.25)以及报告使用门诊服务的患者(OR = 1.43)。年轻患者(OR = 3.36)或患有焦虑症的患者(OR = 2.03)最有可能被转诊至门诊进行后续护理。被诊断患有精神障碍的患者拒绝任何后续护理的风险最高(OR = 1.81)。
尽管存在短期现场CIP,但大多数患者在PER转诊后仍被入院。我们认为该项目的存在减少了原本会拒绝所有后续护理的患者数量。需要更多研究以便更恰当地解释后续处置方式。