Factors Affecting the Agreement Between Emergency Psychiatrists and General Practitioners Regarding Involuntary Psychiatric Hospitalizations

Pierre Alexis Geoffroy,Alain Duhamel,Hélène Behal, Nadia Zouitina-Lietaert, Julie Duthilleul, Louise Marquette,François Ducrocq,Guillaume Vaiva,Benjamin Rolland

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS(2016)

引用 3|浏览0
暂无评分
摘要
Important discrepancies exist between physicians in deciding when to perform involuntary hospitalization measures (IHMs). The factors underlying these differences are poorly known. We conducted a two-year single-center retrospective study in France on patients who were referred to the emergency department (ED) with an IHM certificate written by a private-practice General Practitioner (GP). For each consultation, the official IHM motive was categorized into four groups: Suicide; Psychosis, Mania, or Melancholia (PMM); Agitation; and Other. The alcohol status of the patient was also noted. The factors underlying the ED psychiatrists’ confirmation of the use of IHMs were determined using a logistic regression model. One hundred eighty-nine cases were found (165 patients; 44.2 ± 16 years, 41.3% women). The ED psychiatrists confirmed the use of IHMs in 123 instances (65.1% agreement rate). Multivariate analyses found that IHM disagreement was significantly associated with patient alcohol status and the reason for referral. Specifically, there was an increased risk of IHM disagreement when the patient had an alcohol-positive status (OR = 15.80; 95% CI [6.45–38.67]; p < 0.0001) and when the motive for IHM was “agitation” compared with “suicide” (OR = 11.44; 95% CI[3.38–38.78]; p < 0.0001). These findings reflect significant disparities between GPs and ED psychiatrists regarding the decision to proceed to an IHM.
更多
查看译文
关键词
involuntary psychiatric hospitalizations,emergency psychiatrists,general practitioners
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要