Dataset Information

Acute general hospital admissions in people with serious mental illness.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Serious mental illness (SMI, including schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder) is associated with worse general health. However, admissions to general hospitals have received little investigation. We sought to delineate frequencies of and causes for non-psychiatric hospital admissions in SMI and compare with the general population in the same area.

Methods

Records of 18 380 individuals with SMI aged ?20 years in southeast London were linked to hospitalisation data. Age- and gender-standardised admission ratios (SARs) were calculated by primary discharge diagnoses in the 10th edition of the World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes, referencing geographic catchment data.

Results

Commonest discharge diagnosis categories in the SMI cohort were urinary conditions, digestive conditions, unclassified symptoms, neoplasms, and respiratory conditions. SARs were raised for most major categories, except neoplasms for a significantly lower risk. Hospitalisation risks were specifically higher for poisoning and external causes, injury, endocrine/metabolic conditions, haematological, neurological, dermatological, infectious and non-specific ('Z-code') causes. The five commonest specific ICD-10 diagnoses at discharge were 'chronic renal failure' (N18), a non-specific code (Z04), 'dental caries' (K02), 'other disorders of the urinary system' (N39), and 'pain in throat and chest' (R07), all of which were higher than expected (SARs ranging 1.57-6.66).

Conclusion

A range of reasons for non-psychiatric hospitalisation in SMI is apparent, with self-harm, self-neglect and/or reduced healthcare access, and medically unexplained symptoms as potential underlying explanations.

SUBMITTER: Jayatilleke N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6236443 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Acute general hospital admissions in people with serious mental illness.

Jayatilleke Nishamali N Hayes Richard D RD Chang Chin-Kuo CK Stewart Robert R

Psychological medicine 20180228 16

<h4>Background</h4>Serious mental illness (SMI, including schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder) is associated with worse general health. However, admissions to general hospitals have received little investigation. We sought to delineate frequencies of and causes for non-psychiatric hospital admissions in SMI and compare with the general population in the same area.<h4>Methods</h4>Records of 18 380 individuals with SMI aged ⩾20 years in southeast London were linked to hos ...[more]

PMID: 29486806

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPeople with a serious mental illness are more likely to smoke more and to be more dependent smokers than the general population. This may be due to a wide range of factors that could include a common aetiology to both smoking and the illness, self medication, smoking to alleviate adverse effects of medications, boredom in the existing environment, or a combination of these factors. It is important to undertake this review to facilitate improvements in both the health and safety of people with serious mental illness who smoke, and to reduce the overall burden of costs (both financial and health) to the smoker and, eventually, to the taxpayer.ObjectivesTo review the effects of smoking cessation advice for people with serious mental illness.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Specialized Trials Register up to 2 April 2015, which is based on regular searches of CENTRAL, BIOSIS, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and trial registries. We also undertook unsystematic searches of a sample of the component databases (BNI, CINHAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO), up to 2 April 2015, and searched references of all identified studiesSelection criteriaWe planned to include all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that focussed on smoking cessation advice versus standard care or comparing smoking cessation advice with other more focussed methods of delivering care or information.Data collection and analysisThe review authors (PK, AC, and DB) independently screened search results but did not identify any trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria of this review.Main resultsWe did not identify any RCTs that evaluated advice regarding smoking cessation for people with serious mental illness. The excluded studies illustrate that randomisation of packages of care relevant to smokers with serious mental illness is possible.Authors' conclusionsPeople with serious mental illness are more likely to smoke than the general population. Yet we could not find any high quality evidence to guide the smoking cessation advice healthcare professionals pass onto service users. This is an area where trials are possible and needed.

Project description:BackgroundPeer support provides the opportunity for peers with experiential knowledge of a mental illness to give emotional, appraisal and informational assistance to current service users, and is becoming an important recovery-oriented approach in healthcare for people with mental illness.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of peer-support interventions for people with schizophrenia or other serious mental disorders, compared to standard care or other supportive or psychosocial interventions not from peers.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials on 27 July 2016 and 4 July 2017. There were no limitations regarding language, date, document type or publication status.Selection criteriaWe selected all randomised controlled clinical studies involving people diagnosed with schizophrenia or other related serious mental illness that compared peer support to standard care or other psychosocial interventions and that did not involve 'peer' individual/group(s). We included studies that met our inclusion criteria and reported useable data. Our primary outcomes were service use and global state (relapse).Data collection and analysisThe authors of this review complied with the Cochrane recommended standard of conduct for data screening and collection. Two review authors independently screened the studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Any disagreement was resolved by discussion until the authors reached a consensus. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary data, and the mean difference and its 95% CI for continuous data. We used a random-effects model for analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence and created a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach.Main resultsThis review included 13 studies with 2479 participants. All included studies compared peer support in addition to standard care with standard care alone. We had significant concern regarding risk of bias of included studies as over half had an unclear risk of bias for the majority of the risk domains (i.e. random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, attrition and selective reporting). Additional concerns regarding blinding of participants and outcome assessment, attrition and selective reporting were especially serious, as about a quarter of the included studies were at high risk of bias for these domains.All included studies provided useable data for analyses but only two trials provided useable data for two of our main outcomes of interest, and there were no data for one of our primary outcomes, relapse. Peer support appeared to have little or no effect on hospital admission at medium term (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.75; participants = 19; studies = 1, very low-quality evidence) or all-cause death in the long term (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.31; participants = 555; studies = 1, very low-quality evidence). There were no useable data for our other prespecified important outcomes: days in hospital, clinically important change in global state (improvement), clinically important change in quality of life for peer supporter and service user, or increased cost to society.One trial compared peer support with clinician-led support but did not report any useable data for the above main outcomes.Authors' conclusionsCurrently, very limited data are available for the effects of peer support for people with schizophrenia. The risk of bias within trials is of concern and we were unable to use the majority of data reported in the included trials. In addition, the few that were available, were of very low quality. The current body of evidence is insufficient to either refute or support the use of peer-support interventions for people with schizophrenia and other mental illness.

Project description:BackgroundPeople with severe mental disorders have higher mortality rates and more chronic physical conditions than the general population. Recent reforms in the Israeli mental health system included reducing the number of psychiatric hospital beds ("Structural Reform"), establishing community- based rehabilitation services ("Rehabilitation Reform"), and the transfer of governmental responsibility to the Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) ("Insurance Reform"). We examined how these changes have impacted the physical health of people with severe mental illness as reflected in acute care hospitalizations.MethodsData from the National Psychiatric Case Register were linked with data from the National Hospital Discharges Database for 2000-2019. Acute care discharges from public hospitals were identified for people who had a psychiatric hospitalization with a diagnosis of severe mental illness (SMI, ICD-10 codes F10-F69 or F90-F99) within the preceding 5 years. The discharge rate of SMI patients was compared to that of the total population by age, diagnosis group, and period of hospitalization. Total and age-standardized discharge ratios (SDR) were calculated, using indirect standardization.ResultsThe SDR for total acute care hospitalizations showed that discharge rates in 2016-2019 were 2.7 times higher for the SMI population than expected from the total population. The highest SDR was for external causes (5.7), followed by respiratory diseases (4.4), infectious diseases (3.9), skin diseases (3.7) and diabetes (3.3). The lowest SDR was for cancer (1.6). The total discharge rate ratio was lowest at ages 65-74 (2.2) and highest at ages 45-54 (3.2). The SDR was lowest for females at ages 25-34 (2.1) and for males at ages 18-24 (2.3). SDRs increased over the study period for all diagnoses. This increasing trend slowed at the end of the period, and between 2012-2015 and 2016-2019 there was a small decrease for skin and liver diseases, the SDR was stable for cancer and the increase was smaller for respiratory, infectious and circulatory diseases and diabetes.ConclusionThis study showed higher hospitalization rates in people with SMI compared to the total population. These differences increased between 2000 and 2019 following the opening of alternative services in the community, possibly due to a higher likelihood of psychiatric hospitalization only for those with more severe mental disease. We recommend that general practitioners and mental health professionals in the community be made aware of the essential importance of good physical healthcare, and collaborate on health promotion and disease prevention in the SMI population.

Dataset Information

Acute general hospital admissions in people with serious mental illness.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Acute general hospital admissions in people with serious mental illness.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets