Experiences and impact of psychiatric inpatient admissions far away from home: a qualitative study with young people, parents/carers and healthcare professionals

Background: There are significant clinical, policy and societal concerns about the impact on young people (YP), from admission to psychiatric wards far from home. However, research evidence is scarce. Aims: To investigate the impact of at-distance admissions to general adolescent units, from the perspectives of YP, parents/carers and healthcare professionals (HCPs) including service commissioners, to inform clinical practice, service development and policy. Method: Semistructured interviews with purposive samples of YP aged 13–17 years (n=28) and parents/carers (n=19) across five large regions in England, and a national sample of HCPs (n=51), were analysed using a framework approach. Results: There was considerable agreement between YP, parents/carers and HCPs on the challenges of at-distance admissions. YP and parents/carers had limited or no involvement in decision-making processes around admission and highlighted a lack of available information about individual units. Being far from home posed challenges with maintaining home contact and practical/financial challenges for families visiting. HCPs struggled with ensuring continuity of care, particularly around maintaining access to local clinical teams and educational support. However, some YP perceived separation from their local environment as beneficial because it removed them from unhelpful environments. At-distance admissions provided respite for some families struggling to support their child. Conclusions: At-distance admissions lead to additional distress, uncertainty, compromised continuity of care and educational, financial and other practical difficulties, some of which could be better mitigated. For a minority, there are some benefits from such admissions. Clinical implications: Standardised online information, accessible prior to admission, is needed for all Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services units. Additional practical and financial burden placed on families needs greater recognition and consideration of potential sources of support. Policy changes should incorporate findings that at-distance or adult ward admissions may be preferable in certain circumstances

Age and frailty are independently associated with increased COVID-19 mortality and increased care needs in survivors: results of an international multi-centre study

Introduction: Increased mortality has been demonstrated in older adults with COVID-19, but the effect of frailty has been unclear. Methods: This multi-centre cohort study involved patients aged 18 years and older hospitalised with COVID-19, using routinely collected data. We used Cox regression analysis to assess the impact of age, frailty, and delirium on the risk of inpatient mortality, adjusting for sex, illness severity, inflammation, and co-morbidities. We used ordinal logistic regression analysis to assess the impact of age, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and delirium on risk of increased care requirements on discharge, adjusting for the same variables. Results: Data from 5,711 patients from 55 hospitals in 12 countries were included (median age 74, IQR 54–83; 55.2% male). The risk of death increased independently with increasing age (>80 vs 18–49: HR 3.57, CI 2.54–5.02), frailty (CFS 8 vs 1–3: HR 3.03, CI 2.29–4.00) inflammation, renal disease, cardiovascular disease, and cancer, but not delirium. Age, frailty (CFS 7 vs 1–3: OR 7.00, CI 5.27–9.32), delirium, dementia, and mental health diagnoses were all associated with increased risk of higher care needs on discharge. The likelihood of adverse outcomes increased across all grades of CFS from 4 to 9. Conclusions: Age and frailty are independently associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19. Risk of increased care needs was also increased in survivors of COVID-19 with frailty or older age

Experiences and impact of psychiatric inpatient admissions far away from home: a qualitative study with young people, parents/carers and healthcare professionals

Peer reviewed: TrueAcknowledgements: We would like to thank all participants who took part in the study. We are very grateful to our Parent and Professionals Advisory Group members for their involvement and support in developing key study documentation and contributing towards the interpretation and validation of our results. We also would like to acknowledge the support of the Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre’s YP’s Mental Health Advisory Group. We wish to thank all HCPs along with the support of the NIHR Clinical Research Network who helped identify and approach potential participants. We thank Julie Moss and Alison Connaughton for providing administrative support, and the University of Nottingham for providing research sponsorship.BackgroundThere are significant clinical, policy and societal concerns about the impact on young people (YP), from admission to psychiatric wards far from home. However, research evidence is scarce.AimsTo investigate the impact of at-distance admissions to general adolescent units, from the perspectives of YP, parents/carers and healthcare professionals (HCPs) including service commissioners, to inform clinical practice, service development and policy.MethodSemistructured interviews with purposive samples of YP aged 13–17 years (n=28) and parents/carers (n=19) across five large regions in England, and a national sample of HCPs (n=51), were analysed using a framework approach.ResultsThere was considerable agreement between YP, parents/carers and HCPs on the challenges of at-distance admissions. YP and parents/carers had limited or no involvement in decision-making processes around admission and highlighted a lack of available information about individual units. Being far from home posed challenges with maintaining home contact and practical/financial challenges for families visiting. HCPs struggled with ensuring continuity of care, particularly around maintaining access to local clinical teams and educational support. However, some YP perceived separation from their local environment as beneficial because it removed them from unhelpful environments. At-distance admissions provided respite for some families struggling to support their child.ConclusionsAt-distance admissions lead to additional distress, uncertainty, compromised continuity of care and educational, financial and other practical difficulties, some of which could be better mitigated. For a minority, there are some benefits from such admissions.Clinical implicationsStandardised online information, accessible prior to admission, is needed for all Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services units. Additional practical and financial burden placed on families needs greater recognition and consideration of potential sources of support. Policy changes should incorporate findings that at-distance or adult ward admissions may be preferable in certain circumstances.</jats:sec

Age and frailty are independently associated with increased COVID-19 mortality and increased care needs in survivors: results of an international multi-centre study

Introduction: Increased mortality has been demonstrated in older adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the effect of frailty has been unclear. Methods: This multi-centre cohort study involved patients aged 18 years and older hospitalised with COVID-19, using routinely collected data. We used Cox regression analysis to assess the impact of age, frailty and delirium on the risk of inpatient mortality, adjusting for sex, illness severity, inflammation and co-morbidities. We used ordinal logistic regression analysis to assess the impact of age, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and delirium on risk of increased care requirements on discharge, adjusting for the same variables. Results: Data from 5,711 patients from 55 hospitals in 12 countries were included (median age 74, interquartile range [IQR] 54–83; 55.2% male). The risk of death increased independently with increasing age (>80 versus 18–49: hazard ratio [HR] 3.57, confidence interval [CI] 2.54–5.02), frailty (CFS 8 versus 1–3: HR 3.03, CI 2.29–4.00) inflammation, renal disease, cardiovascular disease and cancer, but not delirium. Age, frailty (CFS 7 versus 1–3: odds ratio 7.00, CI 5.27–9.32), delirium, dementia and mental health diagnoses were all associated with increased risk of higher care needs on discharge. The likelihood of adverse outcomes increased across all grades of CFS from 4 to 9. Conclusion: Age and frailty are independently associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19. Risk of increased care needs was also increased in survivors of COVID-19 with frailty or older age.</p