FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
Ayer — Mayo 14th 2024Tus fuentes RSS

Nursing assessment of mental health issues in the general clinical environment: A descriptive study

Abstract

Aims

To evaluate the effectiveness of a mental health screening form for early identification and care escalation of mental health issues in general settings. A secondary aim was to explore general nurses' use of the form and their confidence to discuss mental health issues with patients.

Methods

A cross-sectional design comprising a review of clinical records to determine use of the form, instances of missed care and escalation to the mental health team. The survey focused on nurses' confidence in general settings to engage in discussions with patients about mental health. Data were collected from April to December 2022. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Statement guided this study.

Results

Of 400 patient records, 397 were analysed; 293 (73.8%) of those had mental health screening by nurses. Age was a significant factor, with younger patients more likely to be screened although concerns were typically recognized in older patients. Of the 20 patients identified with mental health concerns, 9 (45%) were referred for further evaluation by the Clinical Liaison Team. While nurses were proactive in assessing physical risks, assessing risk factors that required deeper conversations with patients, including psychiatric history, was lacking. The survey highlighted fewer than half of the respondents (46%, n = 10) felt competent to engage in discussions about mental health; however, most (59%, n = 13) knew when to seek a mental health referral.

Conclusions

General nurses have a role in the early identification and referral of patients with mental health challenges. However, training is imperative to facilitate deeper patient interactions concerning mental health. Integrating mental health checks within general settings is crucial for early detection and intervention, aligning with global quality care standards.

Reporting Method

STROBE guidelines.

Patient or Public Contribution

We received feedback that shaped the research protocol from a consumer representative.

AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Factors associated with risk of falling among younger inpatients in a mental health setting—A systematic review

Abstract

Aim

To synthesise evidence related to risk factors of falls among younger mental health inpatients age ≤65 years old.

Background

Hospitalised patients with mental illness are at increased risk of falling. Specific risk factors for falls for younger inpatients are poorly understood.

Design

Systematic review.

Methods

Medline, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for studies published in English till December 2022. The review followed the 2020 PRISMA checklist. Odds ratios and P values of significant risk fall factors and the frequency of factors related to circumstances of falls were extracted.

Results

Nine studies were included and 95 risk factors, across seven categories were extracted. These categories included socio-demographic, fall-related factors, functional status, health and mental status, psychiatric diagnosis and assessment, medication, and staff related factors. Factors related to medication, health and mental status are most reported. Majority of the patients sustained minor or no injury from the fall and circumstances of fall vary across studies.

Conclusion

Factors strongly associated with risk of falls were dizziness, use of psychotropics and antihypertensive drugs. A meta-analysis of risk factors was not possible due to different dependent variables studied, controlled confounding variables and control groups used.

Relevance to clinical practice

Fall prevention is relevant to all patients in mental health settings. Approaches to fall risk assessment and management need to be better tailored to younger mental health patients in the psychiatric setting.

Patient and public contribution

Patient or public contribution was not possible because of the study design.

❌