The use of a psychiatric overflow unit in a large urban community hospital to improve process outcomes

Bahareh Aslani-Amoli , Alex Marwaha , Maria Stepanova , Sarah Rhine , Samir Nader , Linda Henry , John Howell , Tanveer Gaibi
{"title":"The use of a psychiatric overflow unit in a large urban community hospital to improve process outcomes","authors":"Bahareh Aslani-Amoli ,&nbsp;Alex Marwaha ,&nbsp;Maria Stepanova ,&nbsp;Sarah Rhine ,&nbsp;Samir Nader ,&nbsp;Linda Henry ,&nbsp;John Howell ,&nbsp;Tanveer Gaibi","doi":"10.1016/j.jemrpt.2024.100083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The United States is experiencing a mental health (MH) crisis with limited resources to meet demands. We established a 5-bed psychiatric overflow unit (POU) within the emergency department (ED) as a care alternative.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Determine the clinical utility and safety of a POU in care delivery to patients in a MH crisis compared to the main ED (controls).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Retrospective study using data from electronic health record/chart review [October 1, 2021–May 31, 2022 (POU established January 2022)] for all ED patients ≥12 years admitted with MH crisis. Per triage nurse, patients for potential hospital admission were POU admitted when medically cleared. Clinical utility definition: ED length of stay (LOS); patient safety definition: return to ED within 72 ​h for same complaint.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Patients (n ​= ​919; POU ​= ​302, main ED ​= ​617) were 61.4% male, mean age 39.7 ​± ​15.6 years, 84.2% ESI 2, 61.7% admitted/transferred, average ED LOS was 932.3 ​± ​804.7 ​min and no returns within 72 ​h. POU had longer ED LOS (1058.7 ​± ​736.5 vs 884.6 ​± ​824.6, P ​&lt; ​0.0001) but no differences among admitted/transferred patients comparing POU vs controls (P ​&gt; ​0.05); Among discharged patients POU compared to main ED had a longer mean ED LOS (819.9 ​± ​779.8 vs 486.4 ​± ​577.3, P ​&lt; ​0.0001); Removal of police escort patients did not change POU ED LOS (P ​&lt; ​0.05).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>An ED POU, staffed with behavioral health nurses, had equivocal safety and clinical utility as the main ED potentially providing an alternative care-delivery option when ED space and MH resources are limited.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73546,"journal":{"name":"JEM reports","volume":"3 2","pages":"Article 100083"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773232024000130/pdfft?md5=6aa69ea634d3a02718d5174c2742bcdf&pid=1-s2.0-S2773232024000130-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JEM reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773232024000130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The United States is experiencing a mental health (MH) crisis with limited resources to meet demands. We established a 5-bed psychiatric overflow unit (POU) within the emergency department (ED) as a care alternative.

Objective

Determine the clinical utility and safety of a POU in care delivery to patients in a MH crisis compared to the main ED (controls).

Methods

Retrospective study using data from electronic health record/chart review [October 1, 2021–May 31, 2022 (POU established January 2022)] for all ED patients ≥12 years admitted with MH crisis. Per triage nurse, patients for potential hospital admission were POU admitted when medically cleared. Clinical utility definition: ED length of stay (LOS); patient safety definition: return to ED within 72 ​h for same complaint.

Results

Patients (n ​= ​919; POU ​= ​302, main ED ​= ​617) were 61.4% male, mean age 39.7 ​± ​15.6 years, 84.2% ESI 2, 61.7% admitted/transferred, average ED LOS was 932.3 ​± ​804.7 ​min and no returns within 72 ​h. POU had longer ED LOS (1058.7 ​± ​736.5 vs 884.6 ​± ​824.6, P ​< ​0.0001) but no differences among admitted/transferred patients comparing POU vs controls (P ​> ​0.05); Among discharged patients POU compared to main ED had a longer mean ED LOS (819.9 ​± ​779.8 vs 486.4 ​± ​577.3, P ​< ​0.0001); Removal of police escort patients did not change POU ED LOS (P ​< ​0.05).

Conclusions

An ED POU, staffed with behavioral health nurses, had equivocal safety and clinical utility as the main ED potentially providing an alternative care-delivery option when ED space and MH resources are limited.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一家大型城市社区医院利用精神科分流病房改善流程成果
背景美国正在经历一场心理健康(MH)危机,但资源有限,难以满足需求。我们在急诊科(ED)内设立了一个拥有 5 张床位的精神科分流病房(POU),作为一种护理替代方案。研究方法:使用电子健康记录/病历回顾[2021 年 10 月 1 日至 2022 年 5 月 31 日(POU 于 2022 年 1 月设立)]中的数据,对所有因精神健康危机入院的年龄≥12 岁的急诊科患者进行回顾性研究。根据分诊护士提供的信息,可能入院的患者在医疗条件允许的情况下被 POU 收治。临床效用定义:结果患者(n = 919;POU = 302,主ED = 617)中61.4%为男性,平均年龄为(39.7 ± 15.6)岁,84.2%为ESI 2,61.7%为入院/转院,平均ED LOS为(932.3 ± 804.7)分钟,72小时内无复诊。POU 的 ED LOS 更长(1058.7 ± 736.5 vs 884.6 ± 824.6,P < 0.0001),但在入院/转院患者中,POU 与对照组相比无差异(P > 0.05);在出院患者中,与主 ED 相比,POU 的平均 ED LOS 更长(819.9 ± 779.8 vs 486.4 ± 577.结论:配备行为健康护士的急诊室 POU 在安全性和临床实用性方面与主急诊室不相上下,有可能在急诊室空间和 MH 资源有限的情况下提供另一种护理服务选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JEM reports
JEM reports Emergency Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
54 days
期刊最新文献
A rare case of yellow nail syndrome in the emergency room setting: A case report Spontaneous perinephric hematoma in an emergency department patient with flank pain: A case report Symptomatic complete heart block: A rare complication of anterior myocardial infarction in a young, fit male: A case report Case of monocular visual impairment Upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A rare presenting sign of pediatric hypothyroidism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1