Search

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic posed new challenges for integrated health care worldwide. Our study aimed to describe newly implemented structures and procedures of psychosocial consultation and liaison (CL) services in Europe and beyond, and to highlight emerging needs for co-operation., Methods: Cross-sectional online survey from June to October 2021, using a self-developed 25-item questionnaire in four language versions (English, French, Italian, German). Dissemination was via national professional societies, working groups, and heads of CL services., Results: Of the participating 259 CL services from Europe, Iran, and parts of Canada, 222 reported COVID-19 related psychosocial care (COVID-psyCare) in their hospital. Among these, 86.5% indicated that specific COVID-psyCare co-operation structures had been established. 50.8% provided specific COVID-psyCare for patients, 38.2% for relatives, and 77.0% for staff. Over half of the time resources were invested for patients. About a quarter of the time was used for staff, and these interventions, typically associated with the liaison function of CL services, were reported as most useful. Concerning emerging needs, 58.1% of the CL services providing COVID-psyCare expressed wishes for mutual information exchange and support, and 64.0% suggested specific changes or improvements that they considered essential for the future., Conclusion: Over 80% of participating CL services established specific structures to provide COVID-psyCare for patients, their relatives, or staff. Mostly, resources were committed to patient care and specific interventions were largely implemented for staff support. Future development of COVID-psyCare warrants intensified intra- and inter-institutional exchange and co-operation., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All other authors declare that they have no competing financial interests related to this study., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Timely identification of COVID-19 patients at high risk of mortality can significantly improve patient management and resource allocation within hospitals. This study seeks to develop and validate a data-driven personalized mortality risk calculator for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. De-identified data was obtained for 3,927 COVID-19 positive patients from six independent centers, comprising 33 different hospitals. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables were collected at hospital admission. The COVID-19 Mortality Risk (CMR) tool was developed using the XGBoost algorithm to predict mortality. Its discrimination performance was subsequently evaluated on three validation cohorts. The derivation cohort of 3,062 patients has an observed mortality rate of 26.84%. Increased age, decreased oxygen saturation (≤ 93%), elevated levels of C-reactive protein (≥ 130 mg/L), blood urea nitrogen (≥ 18 mg/dL), and blood creatinine (≥ 1.2 mg/dL) were identified as primary risk factors, validating clinical findings. The model obtains out-of-sample AUCs of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.94) on the derivation cohort. In the validation cohorts, the model obtains AUCs of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88-0.95) on Seville patients, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.91) on Hellenic COVID-19 Study Group patients, and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.85) on Hartford Hospital patients. The CMR tool is available as an online application at covidanalytics.io/mortality_calculator and is currently in clinical use. The CMR model leverages machine learning to generate accurate mortality predictions using commonly available clinical features. This is the first risk score trained and validated on a cohort of COVID-19 patients from Europe and the United States., Competing Interests: KN, MS, BS are employed by Hartford HealthCare. ON is employed by Benefits Science Technologies. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

The reported findings of the European Consultation-Liaison Workgroup (ECLW) Collaborative Study describe consultation-liaison service delivery by 56 services from 11 European countries aggregated on a C-L service level. During the period of 1 year (1991), the participants applied a standardized, reliability tested method of patient data collection, and data were collected describing pertinent characteristics of the hospital, the C-L service, and the participating consultants. The consultation rate of 1% (median; 1.4% mean) underscores the discrepancy between epidemiology and the services delivered. The core function of C-L services in general hospitals is a quick, comprehensive emergency psychiatric function. Reasons to see patients were the following. deliberate self-harm (17%), substance abuse (7.2%), current psychiatric symptoms (38.6%), and unexplained physical complaints (18.6%) (all means). A significant number of patients are old and seriously ill. Mood disorders and organic mental disorders are most predominant (17.7%). Somatoform and dissociative disorders together constitute 7.5%. C-L services in European countries are mainly emergency psychiatric services and perform an important bridge function between primary, general health, and mental health care.

The authors developed a screening instrument to detect patients in need of complex care coordination at admission to a general hospital. On the basis of a series of risk factors for care complexity, the authors constructed a short, care complexity prediction instrument (COMPRI) and assessed its qualities. The COMPRI is an easily administered screening instrument that detects patients at risk for complex care needs for whom care coordination is indicated. COMPRI's predictive power exceeds all currently available case-mix instruments.

There is increasing pressure to effectively treat patients with complex care needs from the moment of admission to the general hospital. In this study, the authors developed a measurement strategy for hospital-based care complexity. The authors' four-factor model describes the interrelations between complexity indicators, highlighting differences between length of stay (LOS), objective complexity (such as medications or consultations), complexity ratings by the nurse, and complexity ratings by the doctor. Their findings illustrate limitations in the use of LOS as a sole indicator for care complexity. The authors show how objective and subjective complexity indicators can be used for early and valid detection of patients needing interdisciplinary care.

Background: In the frame of the European study on quality assurance in consultation liaison psychiatry and psychosomatics (supported by the BIOMED 1 program), the clinical <> of consultation-liaison psychiatry units pertaining to six Spanish general hospitals is analyzed., Patients and Method: A sample of 3. 608 consecutive patients referred to the consultation-liaison psychiatry units of five public general hospitals (Clínico of Zaragoza, Clínico of Barcelona, General of Alicante, Ramón y Cajal of Madrid, Princesa of Madrid) and one private gynecological hospital (Dexeus of Barcelona) was studied. The data were recorded with a standardized instrument (CL-BDoK-P), validated in a previous study., Results: Consult request took place 10.6 days (on average) after the patients admission (<>), half the requests were urgent, and psychiatric consultants examined the patients 1.9 days (on average) after the request (<>). The most frequent reasons for referral were current psychiatric symptoms (50.3%), unexplained physical symptoms (15.2%), substance abuse (9.2%), psychiatric history (8.5%), suicide risk (6%) and coping with illness (5.8%). The main referral services were internal medicine (17.5%), traumatology (7.5%) and general surgery (7.3%). An important clinical activity is documented in patients frequently considered to be <>, with broad spectrum diagnostic and interventions processes and both in-hospital and out-patient follow-up. However, some problems were also detected in the clinical <>., Conclusions: The results outline the clinical importance of Spanish consultation-liaison psychiatry in the general hospital, but the possibility of improving its efficiency through the implementation of integrative models, organizational changes and modern models of <> is also emphasized.

Objective: To describe the patterns of organization of consultation-liaison (C-L) services in 11 European countries in relation to hospital characteristics and national approaches to C-L psychiatry., Method: Cross-sectional survey., Results: Services can best be described in terms of their size and seniority of their staff and whether or not they are multidisciplinary. Single-discipline services are based upon the standard medical consultant model, whereas those with multidisciplinary teams work in a way that is comparable with community mental health teams. German psychosomatic C-L services belonged to either model. National differences were found., Conclusion: This first international study provides empirical evidence for the wide variation in the organization of C-L services. In view of the increasing numbers of patients with psychiatric disorder who are being treated in general hospitals and the changing patterns of medical care there are important implications for clarification and improvement of the role of C-L services.