Dataset Information

Integrated liaison psychiatry services in England: a qualitative study of the views of liaison practitioners and acute hospital staffs from four distinctly different kinds of liaison service.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Liaison psychiatry services provide mental health care for patients in physical healthcare (usually acute hospital) settings including emergency departments. Liaison work involves close collaboration with acute hospital staff so that high quality care can be provided. Services however are patchy, relatively underfunded, heterogeneous and poorly integrated into acute hospital care pathways.

Methods

We carried out in-depth semi-structured interviews with 73 liaison psychiatry and acute hospital staff from 11 different acute hospitals in England. The 11 hospitals were purposively sample to represent hospitals in which four different types of liaison services operated. Staff were identified to ensure diversity according to professional background, sub-specialism within the team, and whether they had a clinical or managerial focus. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The data were analysed using a best-fit framework analysis.

Results

Several key themes emerged in relation to facilitators and barriers to the effective delivery of integrated services. There were problems with continuity of care across the secondary-primary interface; a lack of mental health resources in primary care to support discharge; a lack of shared information systems; a disproportionate length of time spent recording information as opposed to face to face patient contact; and a lack of a shared vision of care. Relatively few facilitators were identified although interviewees reported a focus on patient care. Similar problems were identified across different liaison service types.

Conclusions

The problems that we have identified need to be addressed by both liaison and acute hospital teams, managers and funders, if high quality integrated physical and mental health care is to be provided in the acute hospital setting.

SUBMITTER: Jasmin K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6659268 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Integrated liaison psychiatry services in England: a qualitative study of the views of liaison practitioners and acute hospital staffs from four distinctly different kinds of liaison service.

Jasmin Keeble K Walker Andrew A Guthrie Elspeth E Trigwell Peter P Quirk Alan A Hewison Jenny J Murray Carolyn Czoski CC House Allan A

BMC health services research 20190725 1

<h4>Background</h4>Liaison psychiatry services provide mental health care for patients in physical healthcare (usually acute hospital) settings including emergency departments. Liaison work involves close collaboration with acute hospital staff so that high quality care can be provided. Services however are patchy, relatively underfunded, heterogeneous and poorly integrated into acute hospital care pathways.<h4>Methods</h4>We carried out in-depth semi-structured interviews with 73 liaison psychi ...[more]

PMID: 31345212

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo describe the current provision of hospital-based liaison psychiatry services in England, and to determine different models of liaison service that are currently operating in England.DesignCross-sectional observational study comprising an electronic survey followed by targeted telephone interviews.SettingAll 179 acute hospitals with an emergency department in England.Participants168 hospitals that had a liaison psychiatry service completed an electronic survey. Telephone interviews were conducted for 57 hospitals that reported specialist liaison services additional to provision for acute care.MeasuresData included the location, service structures and staffing, working practices, relations with other mental health service providers, policies such as response times and funding. Model 2-based clustering was used to characterise the services. Telephone interviews identified the range of additional liaison psychiatry services provided.ResultsMost hospitals (141, 79%) reported a 7-day service responding to acute referrals from the emergency department and wards. However, under half of hospitals had 24 hours access to the service (78, 44%). One-third of hospitals (57, 32%) provided non-acute liaison work including outpatient clinics and links to specialist hospital services. 156 hospitals (87%) had a multidisciplinary service including a psychiatrist and mental health nurses. We derived a four-cluster model of liaison psychiatry using variables resulting from the electronic survey; the salient features of clusters were staffing numbers, especially nursing; provision of rapid response 24?hours 7-day acute services; offering outpatient and other non-acute work, and containing age-specific teams for older adults.ConclusionsThis is the most comprehensive study to date of liaison psychiatry in England and demonstrates the wide availability of such services nationally. Although all services provide an acute assessment function, there is no uniformity about hours of coverage or expectation of response times. Most services were better characterised by the model we developed than by current classification systems for liaison psychiatry.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:We describe the protocol for a project that will use linkage of routinely collected NHS data to answer a question about the nature and effectiveness of liaison psychiatry services in acute hospitals in England. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The project will use three data sources: (1) Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), a database controlled by NHS Digital that contains patient data relating to emergency department (ED), inpatient and outpatient episodes at hospitals in England; (2) ResearchOne, a research database controlled by The Phoenix Partnership (TPP) that contains patient data relating to primary care provided by organisations using the SystmOne clinical information system and (3) clinical databases controlled by mental health trusts that contain patient data relating to care provided by liaison psychiatry services. We will link patient data from these sources to construct care pathways for patients who have been admitted to a particular hospital and determine those patients who have been seen by a liaison psychiatry service during their admission.Patient care pathways will form the basis of a matched cohort design to test the effectiveness of liaison intervention. We will combine healthcare utilisation within care pathways using cost figures from national databases. We will compare the cost of each care pathway and the impact of a broad set of health-related outcomes to obtain preliminary estimates of cost-effectiveness for liaison psychiatry services. We will carry out an exploratory incremental cost-effectiveness analysis from a whole system perspective. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Individual patient consent will not be feasible for this study. Favourable ethical opinion has been obtained from the NHS Research Ethics Committee (North of Scotland) (REF: 16/NS/0025) for Work Stream 2 (phase 1) of the Liaison psychiatry-measurement and evaluation of service types, referral patterns and outcomes study. The Confidentiality Advisory Group at the Health Research Authority determined that Section 251 approval under Regulation 5 of the Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2002 was not required for the study 'on the basis that there is no disclosure of patient identifiable data without consent' (REF: 16/CAG/0037).Results of the study will be published in academic journals in health services research and mental health. Details of the study methodology will also be published in an academic journal. Discussion papers will be authored for health service commissioners.

Project description:IntroductionMany studies have explored patients' experiences of dialysis and other treatments for kidney failure. This is the first qualitative multi-site international study of how staff perceive the process of a patient's transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis. Current literature suggests that transitions are poorly coordinated and may result in increased patient morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to understand staff perspectives of transition and to identify areas where clinical practice could be improved.MethodsSixty-one participants (24 UK and 37 Australia), representing a cross-section of kidney care staff, took part in seven focus groups and sixteen interviews. Data were analysed inductively and findings were synthesised across the two countries.ResultsFor staff, good clinical practice included: effective communication with patients, well planned care pathways and continuity of care. However, staff felt that how they communicated with patients about the treatment journey could be improved. Staff worried they inadvertently made patients fear haemodialysis when trying to explain to them why going onto peritoneal dialysis first is a good option. Despite staff efforts to make transitions smooth, good continuity of care between modalities was only reported in some of the Australian hospitals where, unlike the UK, patients kept the same consultant. Timely access to an appropriate service, such as a psychologist or social worker, was not always available when staff felt it would be beneficial for the patient. Staff were aware of a disparity in access to kidney care and other healthcare professional services between some patient groups, especially those living in remote areas. This was often put down to the lack of funding and capacity within each hospital.ConclusionsThis research found that continuity of care between modalities was valued by staff but did not always happen. It also highlighted a number of areas for consideration when developing ways to improve care and provide appropriate support to patients as they transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis.

Project description:BackgroundConsultation-liaison psychiatry (CLP)-professional psychiatric care provided to coordinate with surgical or medical treatment of inpatients with psychiatric disorders-was included in universal health coverage in Japan in 2012. Despite evidence of benefits of CLP, basic data and geographic distribution information regarding CLP at the national level remain unclear. This study aimed to 1) identify the geographic disparity of CLP in Japan and 2) investigate the association between number of consultations per CLP patient and region.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed anonymized data retrieved from the Japanese administrative inpatient database regarding inpatients who were provided CLP between April 2012 and March 2017. Demographic characteristics were summarized and geographic disparity by prefecture was visualized for fiscal years 2012 and 2016; we also summarized the data according to region. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used to investigate association between the number of consultations per CLP patient and region after adjusting for covariates.ResultsData from a total of 46,171 patients who received 138,866 CLP services were included. Results revealed more patients aged 75-84 years received CLPs than any other age group (29.7%) and the overall male/female ratio was 53:47 in 2016. In 2012 and 2016, 24.2 and 30.7% of CLP patients, respectively, were transferred to other hospitals; 9.7 and 8.8%, respectively, discharged due to the death. CLP services were provided in 14 prefectures in 2012 and 33 by 2016; 14 prefectures had no available CLP services. After adjusting for covariates, Tohoku (β = - 0.220, p < 0.034), Chugoku (β = - 0.160, p < 0.026), and Shikoku (β = - 0.555, p < 0.001) had a significant negative correlation with the number of consultations per CLP patient compared with Hokkaido region (an adjusted R square (R2) = 0.274).ConclusionsOur study clarified the characteristics of patients in Japan who received CLPs and the geographic disparity in CLP services. Although 5 years had passed since CLP was introduced, the results imply wide availability of CLP nationally. The analysis data provided may inform future policies to improve CLP services.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic created pressure to implement telepsychiatry across practice models.ObjectiveWe sought to evaluate the overall success of this change and to identify what types of practice settings, provider groups, and patient groups were best served by telepsychiatry and telepsychotherapy utilization. We were particularly interested in how providers of consultation-liaison psychiatry adapted to remote care.MethodsAn anonymous provider survey querying demographics, education, training, technological experience, practice setting, treatment modalities, patient groups, transition process, and outcomes was made openly available via social media and professional listservs. We used multivariable regression modeling to evaluate for predictors of the positive outcomes of overall satisfaction, subjective ability to diagnose and treat patients adequately using exclusively telepsychiatric platforms, and patient satisfaction by proxy.ResultsThree hundred thirty-three respondents, mostly young (59.4% younger than 50 years), female (69.7%), and physicians (67.9%), completed the survey. One hundred ninety-seven (59.1%) worked in consultation-liaison psychiatry. Of the total, 85.9% gave affirmative answers to overall satisfaction. Multivariable linear regression models found that satisfaction was predicted by general comfort with technology (P < 0.001), but negatively correlated with having technical issues (P < 0.001), a priori skepticism (P < 0.001), clinician being male (P = 0.004), and treating LGBTQ+ patients (P = 0.022). Completeness was associated with having training in telehealth (P = 0.039) and general comfort with technology (P < 0.001) but negatively associated with treating LGBTQ+ patients (P = 0.024) or inpatients (P = 0.002). Patient satisfaction by proxy was positively associated with general comfort with technology (P < 0.001) and the respondent being a nonphysician (P = 0.004) and negatively associated with encountering a technical issue (P = 0.013) or treating inpatients (P = 0.045). Consultation-liaison psychiatrists had similar results overall and were more likely to have other staff assist in making televisits effective (mean [standard deviation]: -1.25 [3.57] versus -2.76 [3.27], P < 0.001) especially if consultative (mean [standard deviation]: -0.87 [3.67] versus -2.39 [3.01], P = 0.010).ConclusionsThis study suggests high rates of overall satisfaction in telepsychiatry adoption, even in consultation-liaison psychiatry. There is distinct benefit in bolstering training, providing technical support, and addressing skepticism. Future research should include patient surveys and control groups and should focus on vulnerable populations such as sexual and gender minorities.

Dataset Information

Integrated liaison psychiatry services in England: a qualitative study of the views of liaison practitioners and acute hospital staffs from four distinctly different kinds of liaison service.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Integrated liaison psychiatry services in England: a qualitative study of the views of liaison practitioners and acute hospital staffs from four distinctly different kinds of liaison service.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure