Article

Connections to primary medical care after psychiatric crisis.

Department of Family Medicine, Family Medicine Research Institute, The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14215, USA.
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice / American Board of Family Practice 05/2005; 18(3):166-72. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.18.3.166
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Patients presenting with a psychiatric emergency face a unique set of challenges in connecting to primary care.
We tested the hypothesis that, in contrast to usual care, case management will result in higher rates of connection to primary care. We examined variables affecting primary care entry, including insurance status, hospital admission, and concurrent linkages to mental health care. Research
This article reports on a preliminary outcome of an ongoing randomized controlled trial conducted with 101 patients presenting in an urban psychiatric setting. Patients were randomized to a case management team or to usual care. The need for medical care was assessed by documenting medical comorbidity.
Average age of the sample was 37.5; 65% were male, and 78% had low income; 37% were African American and 9% were Hispanic. Within 3 months of study enrollment, 57% of the intervention group was successfully linked to primary care compared with 16% of the usual care group, a difference that was statistically significant (P < .001). Associated positive predictors for linkage to primary care included mental health care visits and success in obtaining health insurance. Inpatient hospital stay at the time of psychiatric crisis was negatively associated with later attendance at primary care.
Case management intervention was effective in establishing linkage to primary care within 3 months. Ongoing work will evaluate primary care retention and physical and mental health outcomes.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Timothy J. Servoss, Jul 21, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
70 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There are many factors that contribute to the poor physical health of people with severe mental illness (SMI), including lifestyle factors and medication side effects. However, there is increasing evidence that disparities in healthcare provision contribute to poor physical health outcomes. These inequalities have been attributed to a combination of factors including systemic issues, such as the separation of mental health services from other medical services, healthcare provider issues including the pervasive stigma associated with mental illness, and consequences of mental illness and side effects of its treatment. A number of solutions have been proposed. To tackle systemic barriers to healthcare provision integrated care models could be employed including co-location of physical and mental health services or the use of case managers or other staff to undertake a co-ordination or liaison role between services. The health care sector could be targeted for programmes aimed at reducing the stigma of mental illness. The cognitive deficits and other consequences of SMI could be addressed through the provision of healthcare skills training to people with SMI or by the use of peer supporters. Population health and health promotion approaches could be developed and targeted at this population, by integrating health promotion activities across domains of interest. To date there have only been small-scale trials to evaluate these ideas suggesting that a range of models may have benefit. More work is needed to build the evidence base in this area.
    Journal of Psychopharmacology 11/2010; 24(4 Suppl):61-8. DOI:10.1177/1359786810382058 · 2.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with serious psychiatric problems experience difficulty accessing primary care. The goals of this study were to assess whether care managers improved access and to understand patients' experiences with health care after a psychiatric crisis. A total of 175 consecutive patients seeking care in a psychiatric emergency department were randomly assigned to an intervention group with care managers or a control group. Brief, semistructured interviews about health care encounters were conducted at baseline and 1 year later. Five raters, using the content-driven, immersion-crystallization approach, analyzed 112 baseline and year-end interviews from 28 participants in each group. The main outcomes were patients' responses about their care experiences, connections with primary care, and integration of medical and mental health care. Scores for physical function and mental function were compared by analysis of variance (ANOVA). At baseline, most participants described negative experiences in receiving care and emphasized the importance of listening, sensitivity, and respect. Fully 71% of patients in the intervention group said that having a care manager to assist them with primary care connections was beneficial. Patients in the intervention group had significantly better physical and mental function than their counterparts in the control group at 6 months (P = .03 for each) but not at 12 months. There was also a trend toward functional improvement over the course of the study in the intervention group. This analysis suggests that care management is effective in helping patients access primary care after a psychiatric crisis. It provides evidence on and insight into how care may be delivered more effectively for this population. Future work should assess the sustainability of care connections and longer-term patient health outcomes.
    The Annals of Family Medicine 01/2008; 6(1):38-43. DOI:10.1370/afm.760 · 4.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Numerous studies document disproportionate physical morbidity and premature death among people with serious mental illness. Although suicide remains an important cause of mortality for this population, cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death. Cardiovascular death among those with serious mental illness is 2 to 3 times that of the general population. This vulnerability is commonly attributed to underlying mental illness and behavior. Some excess disease and deaths result from poor access to and use of quality health care. Negative cardiometabolic effects of newer psychotropic medications augment these trends by increasing rates of obesity, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia among those treated. Researchers have developed innovative care models aimed at minimizing the disparate health outcomes of patients with serious mental illness. Most strive to enhance access to primary care, but publications on this topic appear almost exclusively in the psychiatric literature. A focus on primary care for the prevention of excess cardiometabolic morbidity and mortality in this population is appropriate, but depends on primary care physicians' understanding of the problem, involvement in the solutions, and collaboration with psychiatrists. We review health outcomes of the seriously mentally ill and models designed to improve these outcomes. We propose specific strategies for Family Medicine clinicians and researchers to address this problem.
    The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 03/2009; 22(2):187-95. DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2009.02.080059 · 1.85 Impact Factor