Telemental Health Evaluations Enhance Access and Efficiency in a Critical Access Hospital Emergency Department

Telemedicine and e-Health (Impact Factor: 1.67). 05/2014; 20(7). DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2013.0257
Source: PubMed


Mentally ill patients in crisis presenting to critical access hospital emergency rooms often face exorbitant wait times to be evaluated by a trained mental health provider. Patients may be discharged from the hospital before receiving an evaluation or boarded in a hospital bed for observation, reducing quality and increasing costs. This study examined the effectiveness of an emergency telemental health evaluation service implemented in a rural hospital emergency room.

Materials and methods:
Retrospective data collection was implemented to consider patients presenting to the emergency room for 212 days prior to telemedicine interventions and for 184 days after. The study compared measures of time to treatment, length of stay (regardless of inpatient or outpatient status), and door-to-consult time.

There were 24 patients seen before telemedicine was implemented and 38 seen using telemedicine. All patients had a mental health evaluation ordered by a physician and completed by a mental health specialist. Significant reductions in all three time measures were observed. Mean and median times to consult were reduced from 16.2 h (standard deviation=13.2 h) and 14.2 h, respectively, to 5.4 h (standard deviation =6.4 h) and 2.6 h. Similar reductions in length of stay and door-to-consult times were observed. By t tests, use of telemedicine was associated with a statistically significant reduction in all three outcome measures.

Telemedicine appears to be an effective intervention for mentally ill patients by providing more timely access to mental health evaluations in rural hospital emergency departments.

Download full-text


Available from: Jonathan D Neufeld, Apr 27, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As the numbers of patients seeking emergency department care for urgent psychiatric symptoms have dramatically increased across the USA, a variety of different treatment approaches have emerged to best serve this population. This article discusses the most prominent models of psychiatric crisis care and compares the pros and cons of each, with additional
    09/2015; 3(11):1-7. DOI:10.1007/s40138-015-0083-9
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: To characterize disease burden and medication usage in rural and urban adults aged 85 years. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of 5 years of longitudinal data starting in the year 2000 from 3 brain-aging studies. Cohorts consisted of community-dwelling adults: 1 rural cohort, the Klamath Exceptional Aging Project (KEAP), was compared to 2 urban cohorts, the Oregon Brain Aging Study (OBAS) and the Dementia Prevention study (DPS). In this analysis, 121 participants were included from OBAS/DPS and 175 participants were included from KEAP. Eligibility was determined based on age 85 years and having at least 2 follow-up visits after the year 2000. Disease burden was measured by the Modified Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (MCIRS), with higher values representing more disease. Medication usage was measured by the estimated mean number of medications used by each cohort. Findings: Rural participants had significantly higher disease burden as measured by MCIRS, 23.0 (95% CI: 22.3-23.6), than urban participants, 21.0 (95% CI: 20.2-21.7), at baseline. The rate of disease accumulation was a 0.2 increase in MCIRS per year (95% CI: 0.05-0.34) in the rural population. Rural participants used a higher mean number of medications, 5.5 (95% CI: 4.8-6.1), than urban participants, 3.7 (95% CI: 3.1-4.2), at baseline (P < .0001). Conclusions: These data suggest that rural and urban Oregonians aged 85 years may differ by disease burden and medication usage. Future research should identify opportunities to improve health care for older adults.
    The Journal of Rural Health 10/2015; DOI:10.1111/jrh.12153 · 1.45 Impact Factor