Identifying value-based quality indicators for general hospital psychiatry.

OBJECTIVE: To define generic quality indicators for general hospital psychiatry from the perspectives of patients, professionals (physicians, nurses, and managers), and payers (health insurance companies). METHODS: Quality variables were identified by reviewing the relevant literature. A working. group consisting of patients', professionals' and payers' representatives was mandated by their respective umbrella organizations. The working group prioritized the quality variables that were identified. Core values were defined and subsequently linked to preliminary quality indicators. These were tested for feasibility in ten hospitals in a four-week period. Stakeholder consultation took place by means of two invitational conferences and two written commentary rounds. RESULTS: Forty-one quality variables were identified from the literature. After prioritization, seven core values were defined and translated to 22 preliminary indicators. Overall, the feasibility study showed high relevance scores and good implementability of the preliminary quality indicators. A final set of twenty-two quality indicators (17 structure, 3 process and 2 outcome indicators) was then established using a consensus-based approach. CONCLUSION: Consensus on a quality framework for general hospital psychiatry was built by incorporating the perspectives of relevant stakeholders. Results of the feasibility study suggest broad support and good implementability of the final quality indicators. Structural indicators were broadly defined, and process and outcome indicators are generic to facilitate quality measurement across settings. The quality indicator set can now be used to facilitate quality and outcome assessment, stimulate standardization of services, and help demonstrate (cost-) effectiveness.

[On the legalization debate of non-medical cannabis consumption : Position paper of the German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics]. / Zur Legalisierungsdebatte des nichtmedizinischen Cannabiskonsums : DGPPN-Positionspapier.

Calls are increasing for the legalization of cannabis. Some legal experts, various politicians, political parties and associations are demanding a change in drug policy. The legalization debate is lively and receiving wide coverage in the media. The German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (DGPPN) comments on the most important questions from a medical scientific perspective: can cannabis consumption trigger mental illnesses, what consequences would legalization have for the healthcare system and where is more research needed?

La psicosomática y los estados no representados / Psychosomatic illness and unrepresented states

Para muchos analistas, la aplicación del pensamiento psicoanalítico a la comprensión y tratamiento de las condiciones somáticas ha sido problemática y perturbadora. Para tales condiciones, los supuestos clínicos del modelo arqueológico del psicoanálisis que funcionan tan bien para las neurosis no parecen suficientes. Este artículo intentará revisar y reubicar el problema de la psicosomática desde la perspectiva de los estados no representados y la transformación del modelo del psicoanálisis discutiendo las complejidades de la etiología, las perspectivas contemporáneas sobre la construcción, la elaboración de mitos y la reorganización apres-coup [Nachträglichkeit] y concluirá con un breve ejemplo clínico (AU)

For many American analysts, the application of psychoanalytic thinking to the understanding and treatment of somatic conditions has been problematic and disappointing. For these conditions, the clinical assumptions of the archeological model of psychoanalysis that work so well for neurosis do not seem to suffice. This paper will attempt to review and restate the problem of psychosomatics from the perspective of unrepresented states and the transformational model of psychoanalysis, discussing the complexities of aetiology, contemporary views of construction, myth making and après coup [Nachträglichkeit] and will conclude with a brief clinical example (AU)

Quality Profiling at the TCM Hospital Bad Kötzting - Examples from an Ongoing Systematic Patient Documentation.

BACKGROUND: Quality profiling is practiced at the TCM hospital Bad Kötzting since its establishment 25 years ago. The profiling comprises assessment of treatment effectiveness andsafety, structural features, staff qualification as well as diagnostic and therapeutic processes. Findings regarding patients, intervention and outcome profiles are presented by appropriate examples. METHODS: Data of each in-patient were systematically collected by physicians and via self-reports at admission, discharge and follow-up. Over the years the system was adjusted several times resulting in a data pool of about 19,000 in-patients by end of 2014. RESULTS: Patients are 52 years old on average, 70% are female, and suffering from the main complaint since 7 years (median). The diagnostic spectrum changed over the years according to the development towards a psychosomatic focus. For TCM acupuncture therapy 222 different acupoints were used in 7.7 different localisations on average per individual treatment. The mean intensity of the main complaint decreased clinically relevant (Cohen's d = 1.11 at discharge and 0.93 at follow-up). After the hospital stay the number of days of sick leave declined from 51.3 days by 40% per patient and year. Depressive disorders as most common mental illness decreased significantly decreased significantly at discharge (ICD symptom rating; Cohen's d = -1.01). 29.8% of patients met the criteria for a metabolic syndrome diagnosis according to the International Diabetes Federation (IDF). In this group of cases, triglycerides, cholesterol and blood glucose improved markedly at discharge. DISCUSSION: The presented quality control measures clearly contribute to an enhanced transparency in terms of a comprehensive quality profile. The findings from various outcome parameters indicate that patients benefit from the treatment.

[Review Model for the Assessment of Psychometric Instruments--Recommendations of the German College of Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM)]. / Kriterienkatalog zur Beurteilung psychodiagnostischer Selbstbeurteilungsinstrumente--Empfehlung des Deutschen Kollegiums für Psychosomatische Medizin (DKPM).

OBJECTIVES: Psychometric instruments are commonly applied in psychotherapeutic research and care for the baseline assessment of symptoms, the planning of therapeutic interventions, the assessment of the longitudinal course of symptoms and outcomes of therapeutic interventions as well as quality management of care. Psychometric properties as well as economic aspects should be considered in the selection of specific instruments. It is assumed that users of psychometric instruments face a great variety of instruments and related information. For that reason, it seems challenging to absorb the current knowledge and to integrate it into clinical practice and research. Thus, it is likely that well-known, established and easily accessible instruments are commonly used, while new developed instruments might not be disseminated in research and healthcare. METHODS: Based on available international review models, the working group "Psychometrics and Psychodiagnostics" of the German College of Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM) has developed and tested a review model specifically tailored for psychotherapeutic research and care. RESULTS: The different steps of development, as well as the final review model based on the consensus of the working group are presented. The review model contains 6 generic terms (reliability, validity, objectivity, reference groups and aspects of application) with 21 different criteria to be assessed with 0-3 asterisks (*). The criteria are clearly operationalized and the practical use of the review model is explained and discussed. CONCLUSIONS: With the review model for the assessment of psychometric instruments a well-defined evaluation system is made available for research and clinical practice which has been developed by an expert group. The review model facilitates systematic, transparent and comparative evaluation of psychometric instruments along clearly defined criteria. It also supports the selection of psychometric instruments in research and care. Next, the working group aims at disseminating and implementing the review model as well as the application and publication of reviews for different psychometric instruments based on the review model.

Psychosomatic medicine in the 21st century: understanding mechanisms and barriers to utilization.

The psychosomatic approach arose in antiquity as mankind looked for explanations for illness and death. With the rise of modern medicine, the links between emotions and medical conditions, such as cardiac disease and diabetes, were described by astute clinical observers, but the mechanisms for these conditions were based on correlation from observations rather than on experimental design. Psychoanalytic theory was often utilized to explain many common diseases. For example, peptic ulcer disease was blamed upon anger and stress, but scientific methodology discovered Helicobacter pylori to be the significant causal factor of this disease and resulted in the development of more effective treatments. Nevertheless emotional factors are still linked to disease states and morbidity; for example, depression is a risk factor for mortality following myocardial infarction. Advances in neuroscience demonstrate that the reduction of telomere length by anxiety and stress leads to more rapid aging and potential disease vulnerability. Thus, neuroscientific probes may allow for the elucidation of psychosomatic mechanisms. Sadly, clinical barriers, in terms of time pressure upon physicians and the current separation of mental health services from primary care settings, continue the dualistic treatment of many conditions where psychological factors are important. It is not clear whether a mandate for the integration of behavioral health into primary care will remedy this partition and finally maximize a psychosomatic approach to medical care.

How do you know your consult service is doing a good job? Generating performance measures for C-L service effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus in the literature on measures for evaluating the performance of general hospital Consultation-Liaison psychiatry services. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate what indicators might be used to this end. METHODS: We surveyed United States Psychosomatic Medicine fellowship directors (n = 53) about the use of performance measures for their psychiatric consultation services. Results of this survey led to the construction of a second survey, which was distributed to the representatives of services calling for psychiatric consultations at our hospital (n = 21); this survey sought to determine the importance of various performance parameters to overall consultee satisfaction. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of responding psychiatric consult services do not use any of the parameters identified in the literature as performance measures. Consultee satisfaction was endorsed as a valuable performance indicator by 67.7% of them, but no satisfaction rating instrument was identified. The internal survey of consultees identified 11 of 16 candidate parameters as important or very important to consultee satisfaction, of which "consultant understands the core situation and the core question being asked" received the highest rating. CONCLUSIONS: Consultee satisfaction is perceived as a useful global measure of the effectiveness of a psychiatric consult service. We elicited parameters that can be used to create a measurement tool for consultee satisfaction with Consultation-Liaison services. The use of such a tool merits testing in a larger multicenter study.

Assessment of decision-making capacity: views and experiences of consultation psychiatrists.

BACKGROUND: Decision-making capacity (DMC) assessments can have profound consequences for patients. With an aging population, an increasing emphasis on shared decision-making, and a rising number of potential medical interventions, the need for such assessments will continue to grow. OBJECTIVE: To assess psychosomatic medicine clinicians' training, experiences, and views about DMC assessments. METHOD: Online survey of members of the Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine (APM). Of 780 eligible members, 288 responded to the survey (36.9% response rate). RESULTS: Approximately 1 in 6 psychiatric consultations are DMC assessments. Ninety percent of respondents reported that at least half of their capacity assessments involve patients older than 60 years. DMC assessments were seen as more challenging and time-consuming than other types of consultations; yet training in capacity evaluations was seen as suboptimal and half of respondents felt the evidence-base guiding DMC assessment is somewhat or much weaker than for other types of psychiatric consultations. In addition, the practice of capacity assessment seems to vary widely with no consistent approach among respondents. Respondents strongly endorsed multiple areas and topics for potential future research, indicating a desire for a stronger evidence-base. CONCLUSIONS: Members of the APM perceive capacity assessments as common and challenging. Yet they perceive having received subpar training with relatively weak evidence to guide their current practice. Future research should address these potential deficiencies, given the likelihood that DMC assessments will only become more common.

[On the relationship of psychosomatic and mind-body medicine: integrative, complementary or alternative disciplines within an evolutionary approach?]. / Psychosomatik und Mind-Body-Medizin: Integrative, komplementäre oder alternative Disziplinen? Ein entwicklungslogisches Argument.

The text outlines the relation between psychosomatic medicine as an established medical discipline and the emerging concept of mind-body medicine from a historical, clinical and epistemological perspective. Limitations and contributions of both disciplines are discussed and the opportunities within the concept of Integrative Medicine are outlined. Whereas psychosomatic medicine is perceived as a form of transformation through a primarily verbal discoursive relationship, mind-body medicine claims healing through increased traditional techniques of the relaxation response, increased awareness, mindfulness, increasing des-identification and health-promoting lifestyle modification. It becomes clear that mind-body medicine seems to be epistemologically the broader theoretical framework, whereas in a clinical context the combination of both disciplines appears to be complementary and synergistic. The connection between psychosomatic medicine and mind-body medicine can make an important and exemplary contribution to the concept of Integrative Medicine.

Teaching psychosomatic medicine using problem-based learning and role-playing.

OBJECTIVE: Problem-based learning (PBL) has been implemented in medical education world-wide. Despite its popularity, it has not been generally considered useful for residency programs. The author presents a model for the implementation of PBL in residency programs. METHOD: The author presents a description of a PBL curriculum for teaching psychosomatic medicine to PGY 2 members in a psychiatry training program. The goals of PBL are to encourage self-directed learning; enhance curiosity, using case-based, contextualized learning; promote collaborative practice; and support patient-centered care. The addition of role-playing exercises helps PGY 2 residents to develop their skills from simply developing a differential diagnosis to being able to construct biopsychosocial formulations, and it provides these residents an opportunity to practice presenting case formulations to the patient and family. RESULTS: Residents and faculty enjoyed the PBL role-playing sessions. Residents wanted the learning objectives given to them rather than generating their own learning objectives, to move through the cases faster, and to receive more information and more cases. CONCLUSION: Teaching psychosomatic medicine, using PBL and role-playing, allows many of the proposed Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine residency core competencies to be met. However, further refinement of the PBL method needs to take place in order to adapt its use to residency programs.

Psychosomatic medicine and consultation-liaison psychiatry: scope of practice, processes, and competencies for psychiatrists working in the field of CL psychiatry or psychosomatics. [corrected] A consensus statement of the European Association of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry and Psychosomatics (EACLPP) and [corrected] the Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine (APM). [corrected]

OBJECTIVE: In 2008, the Board of the European Association of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry and Psychosomatics (EACLPP) [corrected] and the Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine (APM) Council commissioned the creation of a task force to study consensus-based summaries of core roles, scope of clinical practice, and basic competencies for psychiatrists working in the field of Psychosomatic Medicine (PM) and/or Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry (CLP). METHOD: The task force used existing statements of competencies and feedback from EACLPP and APM symposia and workshops to develop a draft document. After review by the EACLPP and APM committees, and the EACLPP Board and APM Council, a period of comment from the field preceded a final draft resubmitted for consideration of the EACLPP Board and APM Council in February 2010. RESULTS: The two organizations completed approval of final publication of the consensus statement on June 11, 2010. This consensus statement is a summary of clinical competencies, scope of clinical effort, and roles considered by the sponsoring organizations to be fundamental to the practice of this subspecialty or special area of expertise, anywhere, of PM or CLP. CONCLUSION: This consensus statement delineates a set of basic competencies and roles of a PM/CLP psychiatrist to serve as an internationally recognized base that may be used by national societies and institutions to formulate their own competencies, scope of practice, and roles or help with guideline formulation.

[Quality improvement of multiple choice examinations: in psychiatry, psychosomatic medicine, psychotherapy, and neurology]. / Qualitätsverbesserung von Multiple-Choice-Prüfungen: In Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik, Psychotherapie und Neurologie.

We describe a continuous improvement process in planning, performance, and evaluation of multiple choice examination questions in psychiatry, neurology, psychosomatic medicine, and psychotherapy. We analyzed 640 multiple choice questions of 1,419 students during a period of 4 years. Crucial changes concerned the abolishment of problematic question types, implementation of validated new question formats, extension of case-based questions, elongation of question stems, quantitative evaluation of item difficulty, discriminatory value, and the introduction of a peer review system. Consequences of these improvements were greater item difficulty (average 18%) and discriminatory value (average 67%) and reduced post hoc analysis times. Introduction of peer reviews resulted in longer preparation time, which was however appreciated by the peers due to a clear improvement in item quality.