Process of Care in General Hospital Psychiatric Units: National Survey In Italy

2007 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 509-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonella Gigantesco ◽  
Rossella Miglio ◽  
Giovanni Santone ◽  
Giovanni de Girolamo ◽  
Renata Bracco ◽  
...  

Objective: To investigate the process of care in Italian public acute inpatient facilities. Method: Each facility's head psychiatrist (in all Italian regions except Sicily) completed a structured interview concerning provision of treatment and facility rules. Results: Twenty-three university psychiatric clinics with 399 beds (mean=17.3 beds), 16 24 h community mental health centers with 98 beds (mean=6.1 beds), and 262 general hospital psychiatric units with 3431 beds (mean=13.1 beds) were surveyed. Mean length of stay was 18.5±7.1 days, 37.0±55.3 days and 12.0±3.4 days, respectively. Pharmacotherapy was ubiquitous. Approximately 80% of facilities held regular clinical evaluations, supportive talks, and counselling. Dynamic focused psychotherapy was available in 29% of the facilities; 24% provided cognitive behavioural therapy; 32% family therapy; and 39% structured rehabilitative intervention. Vocational training and activities targeted at helping patient integration into their local communities were uncommon. Most facilities did not allow the possession of cutting utensils (96%), personally possessed medication (96%), or lighters (72%), and most had locked doors (75%). Fewer facilities (37%) prohibited the use of mobile phones (32%) and metal knives during mealtimes (37%). Frequency of physical restraint was associated with number of internal rules. Delivery of psychotherapy was associated with nurst provision. Conclusions: The process of psychiatric inpatient care in Italy shows considerable variability. Future clinical practice guidelines should address the currently limited provision of evidence-based psychosocial intervention in these facilities. Efforts should also be devoted to improving the effectiveness of the hospital–community mental health service interface.

1992 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 648-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohd. Razali Salleh

The need to confine and restrain psychotic patients at the turn of the last century saw the building of a few large asylums which soon became overcrowded with the growth of the population. These asylums were the only service available to the mentally ill until 1959 when the trend to decentralise began with the building of general hospital psychiatric units.


2016 ◽  
Vol 51 (7) ◽  
pp. 727-735 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J Spittal ◽  
Fiona Shand ◽  
Helen Christensen ◽  
Lisa Brophy ◽  
Jane Pirkis

Objective: Presentation to hospital after self-harm is an opportunity to treat underlying mental health problems. We aimed to describe the pattern of mental health contacts following hospital admission focusing on those with and without recent contact with community mental health services (connected and unconnected patients). Methods: We undertook a data linkage study of all individuals admitted as a general or psychiatric inpatient to hospital after self-harm in New South Wales, Australia, between 2005 and 2011. We identified the proportion of admissions where the patient received subsequent in-person community mental health care within 30 days of discharge and the factors associated with receipt of that care. Results: A total of 42,353 individuals were admitted to hospital for self-harm. In 41% of admissions, the patient had contact with a community mental health service after discharge. Patients connected with community mental health services had 5.33 (95% confidence interval = [5.09, 5.59]) times higher odds of follow-up care than unconnected patients. Other factors, such as increasing age and treatment as a psychiatric inpatient, were associated with lower odds of follow-up community care. Conclusion: Our study suggests that full advantage is not being taken of the opportunity to provide comprehensive mental health care for people who self-harm once they have been discharged from the inpatient setting. This is particularly the case for those who have not previously received community mental health care. There appears to be scope for system-level improvement in the way in which those who are treated for self-harm are followed up in the community.


Psych ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 792-799
Author(s):  
Vaios Peritogiannis ◽  
Fotini Tsoli

The Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) model of care has been long considered to be effective in the management of patients with severe mental illness (SMI) in most Western countries. The implementation of the original ACT model may be particularly challenging in rural and remote communities with small and dispersed populations and lack of adequate mental health services. Rural programs may have to adapt the model and modify the ACT fidelity standards to accommodate these limitations, and this is the rationale for the introduction of more flexible, hybrid ACT models. In rural Greece, the so called Mobile Mental Health Units (MMHUs) are well-established community mental health services. For patients with SMI that have difficulties engaging with treatment services, the new hybrid ACT model has been recently launched. The objective of this manuscript is to present the recently launched hybrid ACT model in rural areas in Greece and to explore the challenges and limitations in its implementation from the experience of a team of mental health professionals with ACT experience. Referral criteria have not been strictly set, but the number of previous relapses and hospitalizations is taken under consideration, as well as the history of poor treatment adherence and disengagement from mental health services. The main limitation in the implementation of the hybrid ACT service is that it has been introduced in several areas in the absence of a pre-existing community mental health service. This may impact referrals and limit focus on the difficult cases of patients with SMI, thus making the evaluation of the model inapplicable.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document