Sex differences in mortality of admitted patients with personality disorders in North Norway - a prospective register study.

It is well established that patients with serious mental disorders have higher mortality than the general population, yet there are few studies on mortality of both natural and unnatural causes in patients with personality disorders. The aim of this study was to investigate the mortality of in-patients with personality disorder diagnosis in a 27-year follow-up cohort in North Norway, with a special focus on gender differences. Based on a hospital case register covering 1980 to 2006, 284 female and 289 male patients were included. The cohort was linked to the Norwegian Cause of Death Registry for information concerning mortality. The mortality rates were adjusted for age by applying a Poisson regression model. The relative mortality in men compared to women was tested with Cox regression with attained age as the time variable. The number of deaths to be expected among the patients if the mortality rates of the general population in Norway had prevailed was estimated and excess mortality, expressed by the standardized mortality ratio (SMR), calculated. When compared to the mortality in the general population, men and women with personality disorder diagnoses had 4.3 (95% CI: 3.2 - 5.9) and 2.9 (95% CI: 1.9 - 4.5) times, respectively, increased total mortality. Patients with personality disorder diagnoses have particularly high mortality for unnatural deaths; 9.7 (95% confidence interval (CI): 6.3 - 15.1) times higher for men and 17.8 (95% CI: 10.1 - 30.3) for women, respectively, and even higher for suicides – 15 (95% CI: 9–27) for men and 38 (95% CI: 20–70) for women. The mortality due to natural causes was not statistically significantly increased in women, whereas men had 2.8 (95% CI: 1.8 - 4.4) times higher mortality of natural deaths than the general population. Compared to the general population, patients with a personality disorder have high mortality, particularly mortality from unnatural causes. The number of deaths caused by suicides is especially high for women. Men also have higher mortality of natural causes than the general population

Author index for volume 46

Background: Patient satisfaction is an important, but controversial part of health service evaluation. This study dealt with how acknowledgement of illness and treatment needs effected the distribution of positive, neutral and negative evaluations in a group of first time admitted patients to a psychiatric hospital. Method: The participants filled out a standardized user satisfaction form before discharge. The number of positive, neutral and negative evaluations for each participant was calculated and used as dependent variables in analyses (Classification Tree) where acknowledgement of illness (The Patients' Experience of Hospitalisation Questionnaire) and treatment needs (HoNOS) were used as explanatory variables in addition to a number of potential confounders. Results: Different constellations of variables explained the three dependent variables. The number of positive scores was a function of age and worry (PEH); neutral scores were explained by HoNOS rated social needs and GAF (functional scale), both at admission. Outcome (GAF functional scale) and age explained the number of negative scores. Conclusion: (1) Moderately high negative correlations between positive and neutral scores, and between positive and negative scores, together with a positive correlation between the number of negative and neutral ratings was interpreted to mean that neutral scores sometimes function as undercommunicated negative evaluations. These could better be studied by qualitative methods. (2) The worry subscale (PEH) was important in identifying the majority of patients with the highest numbers of positive scores (patients older than 27.5 yrs with high worry score at admission.). The most dissatisfied group was characterised by denial of both mental problems and need for treatment. (3) Patients with high scores on the HoNOS Social subscale had the highest number of neutral scores. To the extent that neutral evaluations have negative connotations, treatment should focus more effectively on the patients' social needs. (4) The smallest number of negative scores was found among older patients with high functional improvement (GAF F). (5) Increasing age consistently predicted higher satisfaction. A better understanding of why younger patients are more dissatisfied is needed

Diagnosing comorbidity in psychiatric hospital:challenging the validity of administrative registers

Background This study will explore the validity of psychiatric diagnoses in administrative registers with special emphasis on comorbid anxiety and substance use disorders. Methods All new patients admitted to psychiatric hospital in northern Norway during one year were asked to participate. Of 477 patients found eligible, 272 gave their informed consent. 250 patients (52%) with hospital diagnoses comprised the study sample. Expert diagnoses were given on the basis of a structured diagnostic interview (M.I.N.I.PLUS) together with retrospective checking of the records. The hospital diagnoses were blind to the expert. The agreement between the expert’s and the clinicians’ diagnoses was estimated using Cohen’s kappa statistics. Results The expert gave a mean of 3.4 diagnoses per patient, the clinicians gave 1.4. The agreement ranged from poor to good (schizophrenia). For anxiety disorders (F40-41) the agreement is poor (kappa = 0.12). While the expert gave an anxiety disorder diagnosis to 122 patients, the clinicians only gave it to 17. The agreement is fair concerning substance use disorders (F10-19) (kappa = 0.27). Only two out of 76 patients with concurrent anxiety and substance use disorders were identified by the clinicians. Conclusions The validity of administrative registers in psychiatry seems dubious for research purposes and even for administrative and clinical purposes. The diagnostic process in the clinic should be more structured and treatment guidelines should include comorbidity

Suicidality related to first-time admissions to psychiatric hospital

The epidemiology of suicidality shows considerable variation across sites. However, one of the strongest predictors of suicide is a suicidal attempt. Knowledge of the epidemiology of suicidal ideas and attempts in the general population as well as in the health care system is of importance for designing preventive strategies. In this study, we will explore the role of the psychiatric hospital in suicide prevention by investigating treated incidence of suicidal ideation and attempt, and further, discern whether sociodemographic, clinical and service utilization factors differ between these two groups at admission. The study was a prospective cohort study on treated incidence in a 1-year period and 12-month follow-up. The two psychiatric hospitals in northern Norway, serving a population of about 500,000 people, participated in the study. A total of 676 first-time admissions were retrospectively checked for suicidality at the time of admission. A study sample of 168 patients was found eligible for logistic regression analysis to elucidate the risk profiles of suicidal ideators versus suicidal attempters. GAF, HoNOS and SCL-90-R were used to assess symptomatology at baseline. 52.2% of all patients admitted had suicidal ideas at admission and 19.7% had attempted suicide. In the study sample, there were no differences in risk profile between the two groups with regard to sociodemographic and clinical factors. Males who had made a suicide attempt were less likely to have been in contact with an out-patient clinic before the attempt. The rating scales not measuring suicidality directly showed no differences in symptomatology. The findings provide evidence for the importance of the psychiatric hospital in suicide prevention. About half of the admissions were related to suicidality and the similar risk profiles found in suicidal ideators and suicidal attempters indicate that it is the ideators who mostly need treatment that get admitted to the hospital, and should be evaluated and treated with equal concern as those who have attempted suicide

Acute psychiatric admissions from an out-of-hours Casualty Clinic; how do referring doctors and admitting specialists agree?

BACKGROUND: Over the last decades there has been an increasing pressure on the acute psychiatric wards in Norway. The major contributor to psychiatric acute admissions at the University Hospital of North Norway in the city of Tromsø in 2001 was the GP-based Tromsø Casualty Clinic, only open out-of-hours. We explored all acute psychiatric referrals from Tromsø Casualty Clinic in 2001. The purpose of the study was to characterize the admissions and assess the agreement between the referring doctors and the hospital specialists according to the need for hospitalization, agreement on application of the law and the diagnostic evaluation to assess whether the admissions were appropriate. METHODS: Retrospective, record based, descriptive study comprising 101 psychiatric acute referrals from the Tromsø Casualty Clinic to the psychiatric acute wards at the University Hospital of North Norway. RESULTS: The specialists accepted all referrals except one, they mostly agreed upon the diagnoses suggested by the referring doctors and they mostly confirmed the application of the law. Seventy-five percent of the admissions took place during weekends, public holidays or nighttimes. Diagnoses of psychoses or suicidal attempts accounted for 76 % of the total referrals. Substance abuse was noted for 43 %, and in 22 % of all admissions the patients had stopped taking their psychopharmacological medication. The police assisted the referring doctors in one third of all admissions, and was the legal representative in 52 out of 59 involuntary admissions. Thirty percent of the admissions were first- time admissions. Thirty-two percent of the hospital stays lasted for three days or less. Median length of stay was 6.5 days. CONCLUSION: The casualty clinic physicians and the hospital specialists mostly agreed in their evaluation of patients indicating that most of the admissions were appropriate. The police was more often involved in the involuntary admissions than intended in the law. The proportion of patients with substance abuse was significant. Alternative treatment strategies should be developed for non-psychotic patients in need of short-term stays

The factor structure and psychometric properties of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) in Norwegian clinical and non-clinical samples

Background The Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) is a 34-item instrument developed to monitor clinically significant change in out-patients. The CORE-OM covers four domains: well-being, problems/symptoms, functioning and risk, and sums up in two total scores: the mean of All items, and the mean of All non-risk items. The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Norwegian translation of the CORE-OM. Methods A clinical sample of 527 out-patients from North Norwegian specialist psychiatric services, and a non-clinical sample of 464 persons were obtained. The non-clinical sample was a convenience sample consisting of friends and family of health personnel, and of students of medicine and clinical psychology. Students also reported psychological stress. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was employed in half the clinical sample. Confirmatory (CFA) factor analyses modelling the theoretical sub-domains were performed in the remaining half of the clinical sample. Internal consistency, means, and gender and age differences were studied by comparing the clinical and non-clinical samples. Stability, effect of language (Norwegian versus English), and of psychological stress was studied in the sub-sample of students. Finally, cut-off scores were calculated, and distributions of scores were compared between clinical and non-clinical samples, and between students reporting stress or no stress. Results The results indicate that the CORE-OM both measures general (g) psychological distress and sub-domains, of which risk of harm separates most clearly from the g factor. Internal consistency, stability and cut-off scores compared well with the original English version. No, or only negligible, language effects were found. Gender differences were only found for the well-being domain in the non-clinical sample and for the risk domain in the clinical sample. Current patient status explained differences between clinical and non-clinical samples, also when gender and age were controlled for. Students reporting psychological distress during last week scored significantly higher than students reporting no stress. These results further validate the recommended cut-off point of 1 between clinical and non-clinical populations. Conclusions The CORE-OM in Norwegian has psychometric properties at the same level as the English original, and could be recommended for general clinical use. A cut-off point of 1 is recommended for both genders

Classification of bipolar disorder in psychiatric hospital. a prospective cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study has explored the classification of bipolar disorder in psychiatric hospital. A review of the literature reveals that there is a need for studies using stringent methodological approaches.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>480 first-time admitted patients to psychiatric hospital were found eligible and 271 of these gave written informed consent. The study sample was comprised of 250 patients (52%) with hospital diagnoses. For the study, expert diagnoses were given on the basis of a structured diagnostic interview (M.I.N.I.PLUS) and retrospective review of patient records.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Agreement between the expert's and the clinicians' diagnoses was estimated using Cohen's kappa statistics. 76% of the primary diagnoses given by the expert were in the affective spectrum. Agreement concerning these disorders was moderate (kappa ranging from 0.41 to 0.47). Of 58 patients with bipolar disorder, only 17 received this diagnosis in the clinic. Almost all patients with a current manic episode were classified as currently manic by the clinicians. Forty percent diagnosed as bipolar by the expert, received a diagnosis of unipolar depression by the clinician. Fifteen patients (26%) were not given a diagnosis of affective disorder at all.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our results indicate a considerable misclassification of bipolar disorder in psychiatric hospital, mainly in patients currently depressed. The importance of correctly diagnosing bipolar disorder should be emphasized both for clinical, administrative and research purposes. The findings questions the validity of psychiatric case registers. There are potential benefits in structuring the diagnostic process better in the clinic.</p