scholarly journals COVID-19 antibody seroprevalence in residential psychiatric inpatients

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S102-S102
Author(s):  
Sheena Shah ◽  
Arshad Hussain ◽  
Sabreena Qadri ◽  
Fazle Roub ◽  
Insha Rauf ◽  
...  

AimsWhile other mental health care outpatient facilities were moved to COVID-centers in March 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences in Kashmir remained the only functional outpatient facility in the region. It is the only mental health care hospital in the country with a residential facility for psychiatric inpatients catering to the whole population of Jammu and Kashmir, India. The Mental Health Care Act 2017 that neccesitated “halfway homes” is yet to be implemented in the state leaving it's inpatients entirely under the institution's care. This study is to investigate the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-COVID-19 virus in the 34 residential inpatients in separate male (23 patients) and female (11 patients) wards. This was done as an audit to strategies and measures taken by the institute in protecting it's inpatients.Method3 to 5 ml of peripheral venous blood samples were collected and plasma extracted and analysed using the CE-IVD Roche Cobas Elecsys AntiSARS-CoV-2, Electrochemiluminescence Immunoassay (ECLIA) for the qualitative detection of total Immunoglobulins (IgG, IgM and IgA; Pan Ig) generated against SARS-CoV-2 (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA). The test was performed according to the manufacturer's instructions.ResultOut of the 34 inpatients, 2 male inpatients tested positive for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 (seroprevalence of 5.88%). In comparison, based on a report conducted by the government's Department of Community Medicine and Biochemistry on the 28th of October 2020, out of 2,361 participants in the community, 959 tested positive (seroprevalence of 40.6%).One of the inpatients that tested positive was re-admitted after testing negative via RT-PCR. The second patient was admitted after being found homeless. He was tested negative on day 1 via RAT and on day 5 via RT-PCR. We believe both of them aquired the infection in the community.ConclusionThis audit shows that the strategies implemented by the institute were effective in the prevention of the spread of COVID-19. Practical implementations of what works and improvisations are the proven methods of decreasing the mortality and morbidity in vulnerable populations while continuously providing vital mental health services.

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 4
Author(s):  
C Pienaar ◽  
A Dreyer ◽  
L Van der Merwe ◽  
B Jansen van Rensburg ◽  
F J W Calitz ◽  
...  

<p><strong>Introduction:</strong> An accused found unfit to stand trial and/or not responsible for his/her actions because of mental illness, is declared a state patient by the court. <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Aim:</strong> The aim of the study was to analyse the biographical data and relevant particulars of forensic psychiatric inpatients who were admitted to the Free State Psychiatric Complex (FSPC) according to section 42 of the Mental Health Care Act (no. 17 of 2002), from 2004 to 2008. Study design A descriptive, retrospective study was conducted. Method One hundred and twenty forensic psychiatric inpatients admitted to the FSCP in the terms of section 42 of the Mental Health Care Act in the period 2004–2008, were included in the study.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> The majority (95.8%) of the offenders were male, unmarried (83.8%) and unemployed (81.5%). The median age was 32.5 years. Most of the offenses against persons were of a sexual nature (45.8%). More than half (55.5%) of the forensic inpatients were diagnosed with schizophrenia, followed by mental retardation (10%) and bipolar mood disorder. Eighty percent (80%) of these patients were found not competent to stand trial and unaccountable. Fifty percent (50%) of the participants received treatment for a mental illness prior to the crime, and were also known to have poor compliance and defaulted from treatment in the past.</p><p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> The findings of this study can contribute to implement effective management and training programmes for the benefit of state patients.</p>


1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 43-66
Author(s):  
Gordon L. Patzer ◽  
Mohammed Y. A. Rawwas

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (02) ◽  
pp. 113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah L Smith ◽  
Jane Melton ◽  
Maria Olyneolo ◽  
Kathrin Buchwald

Author(s):  
Shonisani Raphalalani ◽  
Piet J. Becker ◽  
Manfred W. Böhmer ◽  
Christa Krüger

Background: Globally interest has grown in promoting the rights of patients, especially psychiatric patients. Two core elements of patients’ rights are the rights to be treated in a dignified manner and to give feedback about services. Psychiatric patients may feel treated in an undignified manner, especially during involuntary hospital admissions.Aim: We explored the relationship between Mental Health Care Act 17 of 2002 (MHCA) status and dignity-related complaints.Setting: The study was conducted at a specialist state psychiatric hospital.Methods: We reviewed 120 registered complaints by psychiatric inpatients, retrieved the clinical files, and analysed 70 complaints. Fisher’s exact tests described the relationship between patients’ MHCA status and the frequency of dignity-related or other categories of complaints. Logistic regression analyses were adjusted for potential covariates.Results: Most complaints were from single, literate male patients, aged 30–39 years, with mood disorders. Most complainants were admitted involuntarily (60%). Dignity-related complaints (n = 41; 58%) outnumbered nondignity-related complaints (n = 29; 41%). The proportion of dignity-related complaints was higher in involuntary (64%) and assisted (60%) patients than in voluntary patients (44%). Dignity-related complaints were not significantly associated with MHCA status (χ2 = 2.03 and p = 0.36). Involuntary patients were more than twice as likely as assisted and voluntary patients to complain about dignity-related matters (Odds ratio [OR]: 2.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.71; 7.13]; p = 0.16).Conclusion: Involuntary patients are more likely to complain about dignity-related matters. Qualitative research is recommended for a deeper understanding of patients’ experiences during admission.


2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. S616-S616
Author(s):  
D. Soria ◽  
T.V.C. Vernaglia ◽  
N.R. Santiago ◽  
E.C.F. Ramos ◽  
D.R.D. Leitão ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe most prevalent disorders between the chronic diseases are the mental health disorders. Almost 650 million of people in the world suffer of some mental health disorders, which cause serious impact on individual abilities, family relationship and social rehabilitation.AimsWe describe and study the sociodemographic characteristics and the diagnosis of a sample of male and female psychiatric inpatients undergoing treatment in a mental health care center in Brazil.MethodsIt is a descriptive cross-sectional study, carried out with 517 psychiatric inpatients from a Brazilian health institution – IMAS Nise da Silveira. Data was collected from January to December 2014 and occurred through consultation of the patients’ hospital notes. Univariate analysis was used for the data collection and analysis.ResultsOur sample was composed by 52.6% (n = 272) of men and 47.4% of women (n = 245); 50.5% were over 40 years old and have a long time of hospitalization. Overall, 64.6% had schizophrenia; 27.2% mood [affect] disorders; 3.7% mental and behavioural disorders due to psychoactive substance use; 1.4% mental retartation; 0.4% personality disorders; 0.2% disorders of psychological development.ConclusionThe profile could advance the mental health care and rehabilitation of these people. Although could improve public policies.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.


1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-275
Author(s):  
O. Lawrence ◽  
J.D. Gostin

In the summer of 1979, a group of experts on law, medicine, and ethics assembled in Siracusa, Sicily, under the auspices of the International Commission of Jurists and the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Science, to draft guidelines on the rights of persons with mental illness. Sitting across the table from me was a quiet, proud man of distinctive intelligence, William J. Curran, Frances Glessner Lee Professor of Legal Medicine at Harvard University. Professor Curran was one of the principal drafters of those guidelines. Many years later in 1991, after several subsequent re-drafts by United Nations (U.N.) Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, the text was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly as the Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and for the Improvement of Mental Health Care. This was the kind of remarkable achievement in the field of law and medicine that Professor Curran repeated throughout his distinguished career.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document