TY - JOUR
T1 - Suicide Risk Assessment and Management in the Psychiatry Emergency Service
T2 - Psychiatric Provider Experience and Perceptions
AU - Chunduri, Sruthi
AU - Browne, Sabrina
AU - Pollio, David E.
AU - Hong, Barry A.
AU - Roy, Writtika
AU - Roaten, Kimberly
AU - Khan, Fuad
AU - North, Carol S
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by The University of Texas System Patient Safety Committee Research Grant Award #150271 to Dr. North.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, Copyright © International Academy for Suicide Research.
PY - 2019/1/2
Y1 - 2019/1/2
N2 - The objective of this study was to explore suicide risk identification and flow of patients with differing suicide risk through the Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) to their clinical dispositions. 3 focus groups (N = 15 psychiatric providers working in the PES of a large urban teaching hospital) discussing suicide risk assessment in the PES were conducted, followed by thematic analysis. A total of 7 themes were identified in 624 coded passages. In focus groups conducted to explore suicide risk assessment, discussions shifted to broader matters, e.g., frustrations with the system in which the providers worked. 4 main messages emerged: screening tools cannot replace clinical judgment; the existing electronic health record is not efficient and sufficiently informative; competing demands challenge PES psychiatrists; and post-discharge patient outcome data are needed. These concerns suggest directions for improving patient care.
AB - The objective of this study was to explore suicide risk identification and flow of patients with differing suicide risk through the Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) to their clinical dispositions. 3 focus groups (N = 15 psychiatric providers working in the PES of a large urban teaching hospital) discussing suicide risk assessment in the PES were conducted, followed by thematic analysis. A total of 7 themes were identified in 624 coded passages. In focus groups conducted to explore suicide risk assessment, discussions shifted to broader matters, e.g., frustrations with the system in which the providers worked. 4 main messages emerged: screening tools cannot replace clinical judgment; the existing electronic health record is not efficient and sufficiently informative; competing demands challenge PES psychiatrists; and post-discharge patient outcome data are needed. These concerns suggest directions for improving patient care.
KW - focus groups
KW - improvement of care
KW - psychiatric emergency service
KW - psychiatric providers
KW - qualitative analysis
KW - suicide risk assessment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042922566&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042922566&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13811118.2017.1414648
DO - 10.1080/13811118.2017.1414648
M3 - Article
C2 - 29281594
AN - SCOPUS:85042922566
SN - 1381-1118
VL - 23
SP - 1
EP - 14
JO - Archives of Suicide Research
JF - Archives of Suicide Research
IS - 1
ER -