Search

Background: The comprehensive monitoring of licit and illicit drug consumption plays a crucial role in understanding the complexities of patient conditions and designing effective treatment strategies. In this study, the prevalence of psychoactive prescription drugs, classical illicit drugs, and new psychoactive substances (NPS) were objectively assessed in individuals diagnosed with drug-related psychiatric disorders or episodes., Methods: Blood, urine, and hair samples were collected from psychiatric patients admitted to the Mental Health Department and Drug Addiction Service of the North Rome Local Health Authority with declared or suspected psychoactive drug use. Comprehensive drug screening was conducted for all samples using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-high-resolution mass spectrometry., Results: A total of 71 blood and urine and 50 hair samples were analyzed to confirm the suitability of the ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-high-resolution mass spectrometry method for the study purposes. The main substances found in blood and urine were antipsychotics (71.8% and 66.2%) and benzodiazepines (62.0% and 59.2%), respectively, whereas cocaine (84.0%) and antipsychotics (74.0%) was more evident in hair. Z-drugs were detected in blood (7.0%), urine (5.6%), and hair (24%) samples; amphetamines were mainly detected in hair samples (14.0%). Synthetic cathinones were the most frequently detected NPS in hair specimens (8.0%), whereas synthetic cannabinoids were mainly found in blood samples (11.3%). These analyses showed that patients were polydrug users (77.5% detected in blood and urine, and 94.0% in hair)., Conclusions: Comprehensive screening enabled the assessment of past, recent, and actual consumption of psychoactive substances, including licit and illicit drugs and NPS, by psychiatric patients. A thorough understanding of substance consumption patterns can enhance therapeutic interventions and management of psychiatric disorders associated with psychoactive substance use., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite concerns on mental health problems related to lockdowns, recent reports revealed a reduction in psychiatric admissions in Emergency Departments (ED) during the lockdown period compared with the previous year in several countries. Most of the existing studies focused on the first lockdown not considering the different phases of the COVID-19 crisis. The present study aimed to analyze differences in ED admission for psychiatric consultation during three different phases of the COVID-19 health crisis in Italy., Methods: Information on ED admission for psychiatric consultations were retrospectively collected at the ED of the Santo Spirito Hospital in Rome (Italy), and compared between the three periods: the lockdown (March-June 2020) and the post-lockdown period (June 2020-June 2021) compared to the pre-lockdown (January 2019-March 2020). Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the risk of accessing ED for psychiatric consultation before, during, after the lockdown., Results: Three thousand and eight hundred seventy-one ED psychiatric consultations were collected. A significant reduction of psychiatric consultations in ED during the lockdown period and the post-lockdown (H 762,45; p < 0.001) was documented. Multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that compared to pre-lockdown during the lockdown and post-lockdown patients were more likely to be men (RRR 1.52; 95% CI 1.10-2.12) and more often diagnosed with non-severe mental illnesses (nSMI) (relative risk ratio [RRR] 1.53, 95% CI 1.10-2.15; and 1.72, 95% CI 1.42-2.08); during the lockdown, patients were also more often diagnosed with alcohol/substance abuse (A&S) (RRR 1.70; 95% CI 1.10-2.65)., Conclusions: several changes in the clinical characteristics of psychiatric consultations during and after the lockdown emerged from the present study; nSMI and A&S abuse patients were more likely to present at the ED in the lockdown and post-lockdown periods while SMI patients appeared to be less likely. These may inform clinicians and future preventive strategies among community mental health services., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Aims: The present investigation aimed at evaluating differences in psychiatric hospitalizations in Italy during and after the lockdown due to the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), compared to the same periods in 2018 and 2019., Methods: We obtained and analyzed anonymized data on psychiatric admissions (n = 4550) from 12 general hospital psychiatric wards (GHPWs) in different Italian regions (catchment area = 3.71 millions of inhabitants). Using a mixed-effects Poisson regression model, we compared admission characteristics across three periods: (a) March 1-June 30, 2018 and 2019; (b) March 1-April 30, 2020 (i.e., lockdown); and (c) May 1-June 30, 2020 (i.e., post-lockdown)., Results: During the COVID-19 lockdown, there was a 41% reduction (IRR = 0.59; p < 0.001, CI: 0.45-0.79) in psychiatric admissions in the enrolled GHPWs with respect to the 2018 and 2019 control period. Conversely, admission rates in the post-lockdown period were similar to those observed in the control period. Notably, a consistent and significant reduction in psychiatric hospitalizations of older patients (aged >65 years) was observed in the lockdown (40%; IRR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.44-0.82) and post-lockdown (28%; IRR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.54-0.96) periods. Long-stay admissions (>14 days) increased (63%; IRR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.32-2.02) during the lockdown and decreased by 39% thereafter (IRR = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.49-0.75). A significant 35% increase in patients reporting suicidal ideation was observed in the post-lockdown period, compared to the rate observed in the 2018 and 2019 control period (IRR = 1.35; 95% CI: 1.01-1.79)., Conclusion: The COVID-19 lockdown was associated with changes in the number of psychiatric admissions, particularly for older patients and long-stay hospitalizations. Increased admission of patients reporting suicidal ideation in the post-lockdown period merits special attention. Further studies are required to gain insight into the observed phenomena., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite the growing amount of data, much information is needed on patients' mental capacity to consent to psychiatric treatment for acute mental disorders. The present study was undertaken to compare differences in capacity to consent to psychiatric treatment in patients treated voluntarily and involuntarily and to investigate the role of psychiatric symptoms, competency, and cognitive functioning in determining voluntariness of hospital admission. Involuntary patients were interviewed with the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T), the 24-item Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices, and their data were compared with those for age- and sex-matched voluntary patients. Involuntary patients performed worse in all MacCAT-T subscales. Capacity to consent to treatment varied widely within each group. Overall, involuntary patients have worse consent-related mental capacity than those treated voluntarily, despite capacity to consent to treatment showing a significant variability in both groups., (© 2014 American Academy of Forensic Sciences.)

Background: and, Aims: Immigrants in Europe appear at higher risk of psychiatric coercive interventions. No studies have investigated this issue in Italy. The aim of this study is to investigate whether the use of physical restraint, compulsory admission and other treatment characteristics differ in immigrated and Italian-born patients admitted to a psychiatric intensive care unit., Methods: One hundred first-generation immigrant patients were compared to 100 age-, gender- and diagnosis-matched Italian-born patients. Subjects were diagnosed according to DSM-IV-TR and rated on the Clinical Global Impression - Severity Scale and the Global Assessment of Functioning. Clinical data and treatment characteristics were collected., Results: Immigrant patients were more likely to be physically restrained as compared to Italian-born patients (11% vs 3%; χ (2) = 4.92; p = 0.027; RR = 3.67; 95% CI = 1.05-12.7). No differences in the proportion of involuntary treatment were found. Immigrant patients did not receive higher doses of antipsychotics or benzodiazepines, but they had a longer stay in the hospital., Conclusions: The higher rate of physical restraint among migrants may reflect cultural, ethnic and language differences leading to communication problems between immigrant patients and mental health professionals. Since coercive interventions can be harmful, specific strategies to prevent this phenomenon in immigrants are needed.