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

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

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

The epidemiology of post-traumatic stress disorder in Norway: trauma characteristics and pre-existing psychiatric disorders

Published version. Source at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-016-1295-3 Purpose: The prevalence of PTSD differs by gender. Pre-existing psychiatric disorders and different traumas experienced by men and women may explain this. The aims of this study were to assess (1) incidence and prevalence of exposure to traumatic events and PTSD, (2) the effect of pre-existing psychiatric disorders prior to trauma on the risk for PTSD, and (3) the effect the characteristics of trauma have on the risk for PTSD. All stratified by gender. Method: CIDI was used to obtain diagnoses at the interview stage and retrospectively for the general population N = 1634. Results: The incidence for trauma was 466 and 641 per 100,000 PYs for women and men, respectively. The incidence of PTSD was 88 and 31 per 100,000 PYs. Twelve month and lifetime prevalence of PTSD was 1.7 and 4.3 %, respectively, for women, and 1.0 and 1.4 %, respectively, for men. Pre-existing psychiatric disorders were risk factors for PTSD, but only in women. Premeditated traumas were more harmful. Conclusion: Gender differences were observed regarding traumatic exposure and in the nature of traumas experienced and incidences of PTSD. Men experienced more traumas and less PTSD. Pre-existing psychiatric disorders were found to be risk factors for subsequent PTSD in women. However, while trauma happens to most, it only rarely leads to PTSD, and the most harmful traumas were premeditated ones. Primary prevention of PTSD is thus feasible, although secondary preventive efforts should be gender-specific

Time-trends in the utilization of decentralized mental health services in Norway - A natural experiment: The VELO-project

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There are few reports on the effects of extensive decentralization of mental health services. We investigated the total patterns of utilization in a local-bed model and a central-bed model.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a time-trend case-registry design, 7635 single treatment episodes, from the specialist and municipality services in 2003-2006, were linked to 2975 individual patients over all administrative levels. Patterns of utilization were analyzed by univariate comparisons and multivariate regressions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Total treated prevalence was consistently higher for the central-bed system. Outpatient utilization increased markedly, in the central-bed system. Utilization of psychiatric beds decreased, only in the central-bed system. Utilization of highly supported municipality units increased in both systems. Total utilization of all types of services, showed an additive pattern in the local-bed system and a substitutional pattern in the central-bed system. Only severe diagnoses predicted inpatient admission in the central-bed system, whereas also anxiety-disorders and outpatient consultations predicted inpatient admission in the local-bed system. Characteristics of the inpatient populations changed markedly over time, in the local-bed system.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Geographical availability is not important as a filter in patients' pathway to inpatient care, and the association between distance to hospital and utilization of psychiatric beds may be an historical artefact. Under a public health-insurance system, local psychiatric personnel as gatekeepers for inpatient care may be of greater importance than the availability of local psychiatric beds. Specialist psychiatric beds and highly supported municipality units for people with mental health problems do not work together in terms of utilization. Outpatient and day-hospital services may be filters in the pathway to inpatient care, however this depends on the structure of the whole service-system. Local integration of psychiatric services may bring about additive, rather than substitutional patterns of total utilization. A large proportion of decentralized psychiatric beds may hinder the development of various local psychiatric services, with negative consequences for overall treated prevalence.</p

Structure of needs among persons with schizophrenia

Background: The importance of needs assessment for service development has been widely recognised. Several studies have focused on the associations between ratings of needs by patients and staff and have found clear differences, especially concerning the unmet needs.Methods: The present study is part of a Nordic Multicentre study that investigates the life and care of outpatients with a schizophrenia group illness in all the Nordic countries. The aim of this paper is to study the patterns of needs as identified by patients and staff according to the Camberwell Assessment of Needs (CAN). Quality of life, level of functioning, and psychiatric symptoms were assessed.Results: The sample includes 300 patients, 194 (65%) men and 106 (35%) women. The factor analysis identified five factors for patients and four factors for staff in the questionnaire on ratings of needs. In four of the five patient-related factors a meaningful interpretation was possible, and the factors were named skills, illness, coping, and substance abuse. The staff-related factors were named skills, impairment, symptom, and substance abuse. There were significant associations between the sum scores constructed from the factors and measures of functioning level and symptoms.Conclusions: It seems that the sum factor reflecting secondary needs was the most important of the identified factors among both patient and staff ratings. The item-by-item comparisons in previous studies have emphasised differences between patient and staff ratings, but our analysis of the structure of needs also found similarities in the structures and in the associations between the identified sum scores and measures of symptoms, functioning level, and quality of life.</p

Impact on continuity of care of decentralized versus partly centralized mental health care in Northern Norway

<p><strong>Background: </strong>The issue of continuity of care is central in contemporary psychiatric services research. In Norway, inpatient admissions are mainly to take place locally, in a system of small bed-units that represent an alternative to traditional central psychiatric hospitals. This type of organization may be advantageous for accessibility and cooperation, but has been given little scientific attention.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To study whether inpatients' utilization of outpatient services differ between an area with a decentralized care model in comparison to an adjacent area with a partly centralized model. <strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The study was based on data from a one-year registered prevalence sample, drawing on routinely sampled data supplemented with data from medical records. Service-utilization for 247 inpatients was analyzed. The results were controlled for diagnosis, demographic variables, type of service system, localization of inpatient admissions, and length of hospitalization.<strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Results</strong>: Most inpatients in the area with the decentralized care model also utilized outpatient consultations, whereas a considerable number of inpatients in the area with a partly centralized model did not enter outpatient care at all. Type of service system, localization of inpatient admission, and length of hospitalization predicted inpatients' utilization of outpatient consultations. The results are discussed in the light of systems integration, particularly management-arrangements and clinical bridging over the transitional phase from inpatient to outpatient care. </p><p><strong>Conclusion</strong>: Inpatients' utilization of outpatient services differed between an area with a decentralized care model in comparison to an adjacent area with a partly centralized care model. In the areas studied, extensive decentralization of the psychiatric services positively affected coordination of inpatient and outpatient services for people with severe psychiatric disorders. Small, local-bed units may therefore represent a favourable alternative to traditional central psychiatric hospitals.</p

Decentralization matters – Differently organized mental health services relationship to staff competence and treatment practice: the VELO study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The VELO study is a comparative study of two Community Mental Health Centres (CMHC) in Northern Norway. The CMHCs are organized differently: one has no local inpatient unit, the other has three. Both CMHCs use the Central Mental Hospital situated rather far away for compulsory and other admissions, but one uses mainly local beds while the other uses only central hospital beds. In this part of the study the ward staffs level of competence and treatment philosophy in the CMHCs bed units are compared to Central Mental Hospital units. Differences may influence health service given, resulting in different treatment for similar patients from the two CMHCs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>167 ward staff at Vesterålen CMHCs bed units and the Nordland Central Mental Hospital bed units answered two questionnaires on clinical practice: one with questions about education, work experience and clinical orientation; the other with questions about the philosophy and practice at the unit. An extended version of Community Program Philosophy Scale (CPPS) was used. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, non-parametric test and logistic regression.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found significant differences in several aspects of competence and treatment philosophy between local bed units and central bed units. CMHC staff are younger, have shorter work experience and a more generalised postgraduate education. CMHC emphasises family therapy and cooperation with GP, while Hospital staff emphasise diagnostic assessment, medication, long term treatment and handling aggression.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The implications of the differences found, and the possibility that these differences influence the treatment mode for patients with similar psychiatric problems from the two catchment areas, are discussed.</p

Decentralization matters - Differently organized mental health services relationship to staff competence and treatment practice : the VELO study

Background: The VELO study is a comparative study of two Community Mental Health Centres (CMHC) in Northern Norway. The CMHCs are organized differently: one has no local inpatient unit, the other has three. Both CMHCs use the Central Mental Hospital situated rather far away for compulsory and other admissions, but one uses mainly local beds while the other uses only central hospital beds. In this part of the study the ward staffs level of competence and treatment philosophy in the CMHCs bed units are compared to Central Mental Hospital units. Differences may influence health service given, resulting in different treatment for similar patients from the two CMHCs. Methods: 167 ward staff at Vesterålen CMHCs bed units and the Nordland Central Mental Hospital bed units answered two questionnaires on clinical practice: one with questions about education, work experience and clinical orientation; the other with questions about the philosophy and practice at the unit. An extended version of Community Program Philosophy Scale (CPPS) was used. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, non-parametric test and logistic regression. Results: We found significant differences in several aspects of competence and treatment philosophy between local bed units and central bed units. CMHC staff are younger, have shorter work experience and a more generalised postgraduate education. CMHC emphasises family therapy and cooperation with GP, while Hospital staff emphasise diagnostic assessment, medication, long term treatment and handling aggression. Conclusion: The implications of the differences found, and the possibility that these differences influence the treatment mode for patients with similar psychiatric problems from the two catchment areas, are discussed

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