Considerations for the Writing of Certification Letters Endorsing Use of Emotional Support Animals.

Emotional support animals (ESAs) are different from service animals, therapy animals, and other disability-related assistance animals. Although pet ownership may confer psychological benefits, limited research has supported the use of ESAs to realize such benefits. If clinicians are asked to write a letter of support for use of an ESA, they need to be familiar with relevant federal, state, and local laws that regulate ESAs and with the essential components of an ESA evaluation. This article provides an overview of terminology; federal, state, and local laws related to ESAs; and clinical and ethical considerations for clinicians who decide to write these letters. The authors also review liability issues related to writing these letters, including those related to ESA aggression.

Psychiatry residents' and fellows' confidence and knowledge in interpreting urine drug testing results related to opioids.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have suggested that physicians and residents may not have sufficient knowledge to appropriately interpret urine drug tests (UDTs) in patients who are prescribed opioids or using illicit substances. Therefore, the aim of this study was to survey psychiatry residents and fellows about their confidence and knowledge in interpreting UDTs in patients with chronic pain or receiving office-based opioid treatment. METHODS: All psychiatry residency and fellowship program directors in the New England states were approached to recruit their trainees to participate in an anonymous online survey including a 7-item knowledge test. RESULTS: A total of 93 residents and fellows completed the survey. Only a minority (24.7%) reported any prior training in UDT interpretation. A majority (62.6%) felt confident about interpreting UDTs. The mean total score for the knowledge test was 3.5 (SD =1.1, range: 1-6). There were no significant differences in total score by confidence in UDT interpretation (3.7 vs. 3.4, t = -1.17, nonsignificant [NS]), nor by prior training in UDT interpretation (3.8 vs. 3.5, t = -1.22, NS). CONCLUSIONS: Psychiatry residents and fellows infrequently receive training in UDT interpretation, score poorly on the knowledge test, and their confidence in UDT interpretation does not reflect their knowledge. Future research should evaluate educational interventions that improve UDT interpretation among psychiatry residents and fellows.