RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Coercive measures such as involuntary psychiatric admission are considered a last resort in the treatment of people with psychiatric disorders. So far, numerous factors have been identified that influence their use. However, the link between a pandemic - in particular, restrictions such as lockdowns - and the use of involuntary psychiatric admission is unclear. AIM: To examine the association between COVID-19 lockdowns and involuntary psychiatric admissions in Austria. METHOD: This retrospective exploratory study assessed all involuntary psychiatric admissions and use of mechanical restraint in Austria, except for the federal state of Vorarlberg, between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2020. Descriptive statistics and regression models were used. RESULTS: During the 3-year study period, 40 012 individuals (45.9% females, mean age 51.3 years) had 66 124 involuntary psychiatric admissions for an average of 10.9 days. Mechanical restraint was used during 33.9% of these admissions. In weeks of nationwide COVID-19 lockdowns (2020 v. 2018/2019), involuntary psychiatric admissions were significantly fewer (odds ratio = 0.93, P = 0.0001) but longer (11.6 (s.d.: 16) v. 10.9 (s.d.: 15.8) days). The likelihood of involuntary admission during lockdowns was associated with year (2020 v. 2018-2019; adjusted odds ratio = 0.92; P = 0.0002) but not with sex (P = 0.814), age (P = 0.310), use of mechanical restraint (P = 0.653) or type of ward (P = 0.843). CONCLUSIONS: Restrictions such as lockdowns affect coercive measures and resulted in fewer but longer involuntary psychiatric admissions during weeks of lockdown in Austria. These results strengthen previous findings that showed the dependence of coercive measures on external factors, highlighting the need to further clarify causality and desired prevention effects when using coercive measures.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Delirium is an acute and fluctuating change in attention and cognition that increases the risk of functional decline, institutionalisation and death in hospitalised patients. After delirium, patients have a significantly higher risk of readmission to hospital. Our aim was to investigate factors associated with hospital readmission in people with delirium. METHODS: We carried out an observational retrospective cohort study using linked mental health care and hospitalisation records from South London. Logistic regression models were used to predict the odds of 30-day readmission and Cox proportional hazard models to calculate readmission risks when not restricting follow-up time. RESULTS: Of 2814 patients (mean age 78.9 years SD ±11.8) discharged from hospital after an episode of delirium, 823 (29.3%) were readmitted within 30 days. Depressed mood (odds ratio (OR) 1.34 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.66)), moderate-to-severe physical health problems (OR 1.67 (95% CI 1.18-2.2.36)) and a history of serious circulatory disease (OR 1.29 (95% CI 1.07-1.55)) were associated with higher odds of hospital readmission, whereas a diagnosis of delirium superimposed on dementia (OR 0.67 (95% CI 0.53-0.84)) and problematic alcohol/substance (OR 0.54 (95% CI 0.33-0.89)) use were associated with lower odds. Cox proportionate hazard models showed similar results. CONCLUSION: Almost one-third of patients with delirium were readmitted within a short period of time, a more detailed understanding of the underlying risk factors could help prevent readmissions. Our findings indicate that the aetiology (as alcohol-related delirium), the recognition that delirium occurred in the context of dementia, as well as potentially modifiable factors, as depressed mood affect readmission risk, and should be assessed in clinical settings.
