Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
J ECT ; 2023 Apr 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2299181

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is an essential procedure for a range of psychiatric conditions. Multiple single-center studies have documented reduction in ECT administration in 2020 because of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, but there have been little nationally representative data from the United States. The aim of this study was to examine the demographics of patients receiving ECT in 2019 and 2020 and to characterize temporal and regional variations in ECT utilization. METHODS: The 2019 and 2020 National Inpatient Sample, an administrative database of inpatient hospitalizations in the United States, was queried for hospitalizations involving the delivery of ECT based on procedural codes. Overall number of ECT procedures was calculated based on the overall number of ECT procedural claims. RESULTS: In the 2019 NIS, 14,230 inpatient hospitalizations (95% confidence interval, 12,936-15,524) involved the use of ECT, with a cumulative 52,450 inpatient ECT procedures administered. In 2020, the number of inpatient hospitalizations with ECT decreased to 12,055 (95% confidence interval, 10,878-13,232), with a 10.0% reduction in overall procedures to 47,180. Whereas January and February ECT hospitalizations were comparable in both years, ECT hospitalizations decreased by more than 25% in March through May 2020 relative to 2019 volume. There was regional variability in the change in ECT utilization between 2019 and 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Electroconvulsive therapy use among general hospital inpatients declined between 2019 and 2020, with regional variability in the magnitude of change. Further study is warranted into the root causes and optimal responses to these changes.

2.
J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry ; 64(3): 199-208, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2239062

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2010, the Academy of Consultation-Liaison (then Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine) surveyed US residency programs to understand training in consultation-liaison (CL) psychiatry, leading to recommendations in 2014. Since then, residency training in CL has evolved in the context of competing training demands, increased prioritization of electives, and reactions to coronavirus 2019. OBJECTIVE: To determine the current state of residency training in CL across the United States, including the structure of core and elective resident rotations in CL, attending physician staffing, presence of fellows and other trainees, didactic curriculum, and impact of coronavirus 2019. METHODS: Members of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Residency Education Subcommittee designed and piloted an 81-question survey tool that was sent to program directors of 269 US general psychiatry training programs for voluntary completion. RESULTS: One hundred three of 269 programs responded to the survey, yielding a response rate of 38.3%. Responding programs were larger and more likely to have a CL fellowship than nonresponding programs. Of the 103 responding programs, 82.5% have more than the minimally required time on CL, with 46.6% reporting an increase in total CL time in the past decade. Since 2010, 18.4% of responding programs changed the placement of the CL rotation, with 43.7% now adherent to the 2014 Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine recommendation to include core CL training in the second half of residency. Thirty-five percent of responding programs require residents to rotate on more than 1 CL service, and 19.4% have a required outpatient CL component. Faculty full-time equivalent varies widely. Of all services included, 33.8% report that all CL faculty are board-certified in CL psychiatry, whereas 18.7% have no board-certified faculty. Of the 103 responding programs, 36.9% offer a CL fellowship, but 31.1% report no residency graduates pursuing CL fellowships in the past 5 years. Of the included programs, 77.7% have a formal CL curriculum for residents, with 34.0% reporting a separate didactic series during the CL rotation. CONCLUSIONS: Among the responding programs, the amount of time spent on core CL rotations has increased in the past decade, but programs have also shifted CL training earlier in the course of residency. Residency programs are increasingly challenged to provide an optimal CL experience, and updated guidance from Academy of Consultation-Liaison may be appreciated.


Subject(s)
Internship and Residency , Psychiatry , United States , Follow-Up Studies , Psychiatry/education , Curriculum , Referral and Consultation
3.
J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry ; 2022 Aug 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2239073

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common in the setting of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Anecdotal evidence and case reports suggest that patients with delirium in the setting of Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) may exhibit specific features, including increased tone, abulia, and alogia. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether differences exist in sociodemographic and medical characteristics, physical examination findings, and medication use in delirious patients with and without COVID-19 infection referred for psychiatric consultation. METHODS: We undertook an exploratory, retrospective chart review of 486 patients seen by the psychiatry consultation service at a tertiary care hospital from March 10 to May 15, 2020. Delirious patients were diagnosed via clinical examination by a psychiatric consultant, and these patients were stratified by COVID-19 infection status. The strata were described and compared using bivariate analyses across sociodemographic, historical, objective, and treatment-related variables. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients were diagnosed with delirium during the study period. Thirty-six were COVID-19+. Median age was 63 years and did not differ between groups. COVID-19+ patients with delirium were more likely to present from nursing facilities (39% vs 11%; Fisher's exact test; P = 0.001) and have a history of schizophrenia (11% vs 0%; Fisher's exact test; P = 0.011). Myoclonus (28% vs 4%; P = 0.002), hypertonia (36% vs 10%; P = 0.003), withdrawal (36% vs 15%; P = 0.011), akinesia (19% vs 6%; P = 0.034), abulia (19% vs 3%; P = 0.004), and alogia (25% vs 8%; P = 0.012) were more common in COVID-19+ patients. COVID-19+ delirious patients were significantly more likely to have received ketamine (28% vs 7%; P = 0.006), alpha-adrenergic agents besides dexmedetomidine (36% vs 14%; P = 0.014), and enteral antipsychotics (92% vs 66%; P = 0.007) at some point. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 delirium referred for psychiatric consultation are more likely to reside in nursing facilities and have a history of schizophrenia than delirious patients without COVID-19. Patients with delirium in the setting of COVID-19 may exhibit features consistent with akinetic mutism. Psychiatrists must assess for such features, as they may influence management choices and the risk of side effects with agents commonly used in the setting of delirium.

4.
J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry ; 64(3): 209-217, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2232754

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with a range of neuropsychiatric manifestations. While case reports and case series have reported catatonia in the setting of COVID-19 infection, its rate has been poorly characterized. OBJECTIVE: This study reports the co-occurrence of catatonia and COVID-19 diagnoses among acute care hospital discharges in the United States in 2020. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample, an all-payors database of acute care hospital discharges, was queried for patients of any age discharged with a diagnosis of catatonia and COVID-19 in 2020. RESULTS: Among 32,355,827 hospitalizations in the 2020 National Inpatient Sample, an estimated 15,965 (95% confidence interval: 14,992-16,938) involved a diagnosis of catatonia without COVID-19 infection, 1,678,385 (95% confidence interval: 1,644,738-1,712,022) involved a diagnosis of COVID-19 without a co-occurring catatonia diagnosis, and 610 (95% confidence interval: 578-642) involved both catatonia and COVID-19 infection. In an adjusted model, a diagnosis of COVID-19, but not a diagnosis of catatonia or the combination of catatonia and COVID-19, was associated with increased mortality. Patients with catatonia and COVID-19 were frequently diagnosed with encephalopathy and delirium codes. CONCLUSIONS: Catatonia and COVID-19 were rarely co-diagnosed in 2020, and catatonia diagnosis was not associated with increased mortality in patients with COVID-19. Further research is needed to better characterize the phenomenology of catatonia in the setting of COVID-19 infection and its optimal treatment.


Subject(s)
Brain Diseases , COVID-19 , Catatonia , Humans , United States/epidemiology , Catatonia/diagnosis , Catatonia/epidemiology , Inpatients , COVID-19/complications , Hospitalization , Brain Diseases/complications
5.
J Psychosom Res ; 150: 110619, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440221

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to detail changes in presentations at a United States Emergency Department for suicidality before and after the outbreak of COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted of all adult patients who presented to an ED with suicidality and underwent psychiatric consultation during the study period. The cohorts consisted of patients who presented between December 2018 - May 2019 and December 2019 - May 2020. Information was collected on demographics, characteristics of suicidality, reasons for suicidality and disposition. The first wave from March - May 2020 was examined, using a difference-in-differences design to control for factors other than COVID-19 that may have influenced the outcomes' trend. RESULTS: Immediately following the pandemic outbreak there was a statistically significant increase in the proportion of undomiciled patients represented in visits for suicidality (40.7% vs. 57.4%; p-value <0.001). In addition, the proportion of patient visits attributed to social (18.0% vs. 29.2%; p-value 0.003) and structural (14.2% vs. 26.4%; p value <0.001) reasons for suicidality increased. Conversely, the proportion of visits due to psychiatric symptoms (70.5% vs 50.0%; p-value <0.001) decreased. Furthermore, patient visits were more likely to result in a medical admission (2.1% vs. 8.3%; p-value 0.002) and less likely to result in a psychiatric admission (68.4% vs 48.6%; p-value <0.001) during the initial phase of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 was associated with increased ED presentations for suicidality among undomiciled patients, as well as greater likelihood of social and structural reasons driving suicidality among all visits.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Suicidal Ideation , Adult , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
6.
PLoS One ; 16(6): e0253805, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1288689

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association between COVID-19 and Emergency Department (ED) psychiatric presentations, including suicidal ideation. METHODS: Using an interrupted time series design, we analyzed psychiatric presentations using electronic health record data in an academic medical center ED between 2018 and 2020. We used regression models to assess the association between the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak and certain psychiatric presentations. The period February 26-March 6, 2020 was used to define patterns in psychiatric presentations before and after the coronavirus outbreak. RESULTS: We found a 36.2% decrease (unadjusted) in ED psychiatric consults following the coronavirus outbreak, as compared to the previous year. After accounting for underlying trends, our results estimate significant differential change associated with suicidal ideation and substance use disorder (SUD) presentations following the outbreak. Specifically, we noted a significant differential increase in presentations with suicidal ideation six weeks after the outbreak (36.4 percentage points change; 95% CI: 5.3, 67.6). For presentations with SUD, we found a differential increase in the COVID-19 time series relative to the comparison time series at all post-outbreak time points and this differential increase was significant three weeks (32.8 percentage points; 95% CI: 4.0, 61.6) following the outbreak. Our results estimate no differential changes significant at the P value < 0.05 level associated with affective disorder or psychotic disorder presentations in the COVID-19 time series relative to the comparator time series. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 outbreak in Boston was associated with significant differential increases in ED presentations with suicidal ideation and SUD.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Suicidal Ideation , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data
7.
Gerontologist ; 61(5): 650-660, 2021 07 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1180583

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected persons with existing chronic health conditions. The pandemic also has the potential to exacerbate the stresses of family caregiving. We compare family caregivers with noncaregivers on physical, psychosocial, and financial well-being outcomes during the pandemic and determine family caregivers most at risk for adverse outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of 576 family caregivers and 2,933 noncaregivers from April to May 2020 in Pittsburgh, PA region with a national supplement. Outcome measures included concurrent anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, social participation, and financial well-being and perceived changes due to COVID-19 (loneliness, financial well-being, food security). We also measured sociodemographic, caregiving contextual variables, and COVID-19-related caregiver stressors (COVID Caregiver Risk Index). RESULTS: Controlling for sociodemographics, family caregivers reported higher anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, lower social participation, lower financial well-being, increased food insecurity (all p < .01), and increased financial worries (p = .01). Caregivers who reported more COVID-19-related caregiver stressors and disruptions reported more adverse outcomes (all p < .01). In addition, caregivers who were female, younger, lower income, providing both personal/medical care, and providing care for cognitive/behavioral/emotional problems reported more adverse outcomes. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Challenges of caregiving are exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Family caregivers reported increased duties, burdens, and resulting adverse health, psychosocial, and financial outcomes. Results were generally consistent with caregiver stress-health process models. Family caregivers should receive increased support during this serious public health crisis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Caregivers , Cross-Sectional Studies , Family , Female , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Psychosomatics ; 61(6): 585-596, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-726823

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as one of the biggest health threats of our generation. A significant portion of patients are presenting with delirium and neuropsychiatric sequelae of the disease. Unique examination findings and responses to treatment have been identified. OBJECTIVE: In this article, we seek to provide pharmacologic and treatment recommendations specific to delirium in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a literature search reviewing the neuropsychiatric complications and treatments in prior coronavirus epidemics including Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses, as well as the emerging literature regarding COVID-19. We also convened a work group of consultation-liaison psychiatrists actively managing patients with COVID-19 in our hospital. Finally, we synthesized these findings to provide preliminary pharmacologic recommendations for treating delirium in these patients. RESULTS: Delirium is frequently found in patients who test positive for COVID-19, even in the absence of respiratory symptoms. There appears to be a higher rate of agitation, myoclonus, abulia, and alogia. No data are currently available on the treatment of delirium in patients with COVID-19. Extrapolating from general delirium treatment, Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome/severe acute respiratory syndrome case reports, and our experience, preliminary recommendations for pharmacologic management have been assembled. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 is associated with neuropsychiatric symptoms. Low-potency neuroleptics and alpha-2 adrenergic agents may be especially useful in this setting. Further research into the pathophysiology of COVID-19 will be key in developing more targeted treatment guidelines.


Subject(s)
Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Agonists/therapeutic use , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Brain Diseases/physiopathology , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Delirium/drug therapy , Dopamine Agonists/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Betacoronavirus , Brain Diseases/psychology , COVID-19 , Central Nervous System Depressants/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Delirium/physiopathology , Delirium/psychology , GABA Modulators/therapeutic use , Humans , Lorazepam/therapeutic use , Melatonin/therapeutic use , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Gen Hosp Psychiatry ; 65: 47-53, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-327315

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Neuropsychiatric manifestations of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been described, including anosmia, ageusia, headache, paresthesia, encephalitis and encephalopathy. Little is known about the mechanisms by which the virus causes central nervous system (CNS) symptoms, and therefore little guidance is available regarding potential workup or management options. CASES: We present a series of four consecutive cases, seen by our psychiatry consultation service over a one-week period, each of which manifested delirium as a result of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). DISCUSSION: The four cases highlighted here all occurred in older patients with premorbid evidence of cognitive decline. Unique features seen in multiple cases included rigidity, alogia, abulia, and elevated inflammatory markers. In all four cases, a change in mental status was the presenting symptom, and three of the four cases lacked significant respiratory symptoms. In addition to discussing unique features of the cases, we discuss possible pathophysiologic explanations for COVID-19 delirium. CONCLUSIONS: Delirium should be recognized as a potential feature of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and may be the only presenting symptom. Based on the high rates of delirium demonstrated in prior studies, hospitals should consider adding mental status changes to the list of testing criteria. Further research is needed to determine if delirium in COVID-19 represents a primary encephalopathy heralding invasion of the CNS by the virus, or a secondary encephalopathy related to systemic inflammatory response or other factors.


Subject(s)
Brain Diseases/etiology , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Delirium/etiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brain Diseases/virology , COVID-19 , Cognitive Dysfunction/complications , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Delirium/virology , Female , Humans , Male
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL