Dataset Information

Survey of Clinician Experiences of Telepsychiatry and Tele-Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic created pressure to implement telepsychiatry across practice models.

Objective

We 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.

Methods

An 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.

Results

Three 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).

Conclusions

This 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.

SUBMITTER: Mishkin AD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8591977 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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 led to rapid changes in clinical service delivery across hospital systems nationally. Local realities and resources were key driving factors impacting workflow changes, including for pediatric consultation-liaison psychiatry service (PCLPS) providers.ObjectiveThis study aims to describe the early changes implemented by 22 PCLPSs from the United States and Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding similarities and differences in adaptations made to PCLPS care delivery can inform best practices and future models of care.MethodsA 20-point survey relating to PCLPS changes during the COVID-19 pandemic was sent to professional listservs. Baseline hospital demographics, hospital and PCLPS workflow changes, and PCLPS experience were collected from March 20 to April 28, 2020, and from August 18 to September 10, 2020. Qualitative data were collected from responding sites. An exploratory thematic analysis approach was used to analyze the qualitative data that were not dependent on predetermined coding themes. Descriptive statistics were calculated using Microsoft Excel.ResultsTwenty-two academic hospitals in the United States and Canada responded to the survey, with an average of 303 beds/hospital. Most respondents (18/22) were children's hospitals. Despite differences in regional impact of COVID-19 and resource availability, there was significant overlap in respondent experiences. Restricted visitation to one caregiver, use of virtual rounding, ongoing trainee involvement, and an overall low number of COVID-positive pediatric patients were common. While there was variability in PCLPS care delivery occurring virtually versus in person, all respondents maintained some level of on-site presence. Technological limitations and pediatric provider preference led to increased on-site presence.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first multicenter study exploring pandemic-related PCLPS changes in North America. Findings of this study demonstrate that PCLPSs rapidly adapted to COVID-19 realities. Common themes emerged that may serve as a model for future practice. However, important gaps in understanding their effectiveness and acceptability need to be addressed. This multisite survey highlights the importance of establishing consensus through national professional organizations to inform provider and hospital practices.

Project description:ObjectivesTo explore primary care clinician perceptions of barriers and facilitators in delivering care for common mental disorders (CMD) before and after implementation of a consultation-liaison psychiatry service (Psychiatry in Primary Care (PIPC)) in government-operated primary care clinics and to explore the clinicians' experience of the PIPC service itself.DesignThis longitudinal qualitative study was informed by the Normalisation Process Model and involved audiotaped semi-structured individual interviews with front-line clinicians before (Time 1) and after (Time 2) the PIPC intervention. The Framework Method was used in the thematic analysis of pre/post interview transcripts.SettingTwo government-operated primary care clinics in Penang, Malaysia.Participants17 primary care medical, nursing and allied health staff recruited purposely to achieve a range of disciplines and a balanced representation from both clinics.InterventionPsychiatrists, accompanied by medical students in small numbers, provided one half-day consultation visit per week, to front-line clinicians in each clinic over an 8-month period. The service involved psychiatric assessment of patients with suspected CMDs, with face-to-face discussion with the referring clinician before and after the patient assessment.ResultsAt Time 1 interviewees tended to equate CMDs with stress and embraced a holistic model of care while also reporting considerable autonomy in mental healthcare and positively appraising their current practices. At Time 2, post-intervention, participants demonstrated a shift towards greater understanding of CMDs as treatable conditions. They reported time pressures and the demands of key performance indicators in other areas as barriers to participation in PIPC. Yet they showed increased awareness of current service deficits and of their potential in delivering improved mental healthcare.ConclusionsDespite resource-related and structural barriers to implementation of national mental health policy in Malaysian primary care settings, our findings suggest that front-line clinicians are receptive to future interventions designed to improve the mental healthcare capacity.

Project description:BackgroundLittle information exists on the perceptions of psychiatrists regarding the implementation and various impacts of the consultation-liaison model. This model has been used in Quebec (Canada) through the function of specialist respondent-psychiatrists (SRP) since 2009. This study assessed the main activities, barriers or facilitators, and impact of SRP in adult and child-adolescent psychiatry on the capacity of service providers in primary care and youth centers to treat patients with mental health disorders (MHD).MethodsData included 126 self-administered questionnaires from SRP and semi-structured interviews from 48 SRP managers. Mixed methods were used, with qualitative findings from managers complementing the SRP survey. Comparative analyses of SRP responses in adult versus child-adolescent psychiatry were also conducted.ResultsPsychiatrists dedicated a median 24.12 h/month to the SRP function, mainly involving case discussions with primary care teams or youth centers. They were confident about the level of support they provided and satisfied with their influence in clinical decision-making, but less satisfied with the support provided by their organizations. SRP evaluated their impacts on clinical practice as moderate, particularly among general practitioners (GP). SRP working in child-adolescent psychiatry were more comfortable, motivated, and positive about their overall performance and impact than in adult psychiatry. Organizational barriers (e.g. team instability) were most prevalent, followed by system-level factors (e.g. network size and complexity, lack of resources, model inflexibility) and individual factors (e.g. GP reluctance to treat patients with MHD). Organizational facilitators included support from family medicine group directors, collaboration with university family medicine groups and coordination by liaison nurses; at the system level, pre-existing relationships and working in the same institution; while individual-level facilitators included SRP personality and strong organizational support.ConclusionQuebec SRP were implemented sparingly in family medicine groups and youth centers, while SRP viewed their overall impact as moderate. Results were more positive in child-adolescent psychiatry than in adult psychiatry. Increased support for the SRP function, adapting the model to GP in need of more direct support, and resolving key system issues may improve SRP effectiveness in terms of team stability, coordination among providers, access to MH services and readiness to implement innovations.