精神急症还是普通急症:进化还是退化?心理健康与急救专业人员的质性研究

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Camuccio Carlo Alberto, Zara Silvia
{"title":"精神急症还是普通急症:进化还是退化?心理健康与急救专业人员的质性研究","authors":"Camuccio Carlo Alberto,&nbsp;Zara Silvia","doi":"10.1111/inm.70063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The treatment of individuals with psychiatric disorders who visit the Emergency Department (ED) remains a significant issue within healthcare organisations. Over the past decades, various organisational solutions have been proposed, ranging from dedicated Emergency Departments to liaison mechanisms involving mental health nurses within EDs or direct access to acute units. On one hand, there are clinical and organisational needs pushing towards the creation of dedicated pathways; on the other hand, there are concerns that such solutions may be counterproductive and dangerous in terms of health and social inclusion. The aim of this study is to assess the opinions of Mental Health and Emergency professionals on the advantages and disadvantages of clinical and organisational pathways dedicated to patients with psychiatric disorders who visit the general ED. The study was conducted using a qualitative research approach: semi-structured interviews were carried out through purposeful sampling composed of two cohorts: Emergency and Mental Health professionals. The data were analysed using content analysis with the software Atlas.ti. Forty-five interviews were collected, and six main themes/families were identified. A certain distance in opinions between the two cohorts emerged, especially regarding the adoption of dedicated pathways. In both cohorts, but particularly in the mental health cohort, there is a fear of stigmatisation and violation of patients' rights in dedicated pathways. Both groups believe that there is a need for more specific training and greater multidisciplinarity. This study adheres to the COREQ checklist for qualitative studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":14007,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Mental Health Nursing","volume":"34 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/inm.70063","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychiatric Emergency or General Emergency: Evolution or Involution? A Qualitative Study With Mental Health and Emergency Professionals\",\"authors\":\"Camuccio Carlo Alberto,&nbsp;Zara Silvia\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/inm.70063\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The treatment of individuals with psychiatric disorders who visit the Emergency Department (ED) remains a significant issue within healthcare organisations. Over the past decades, various organisational solutions have been proposed, ranging from dedicated Emergency Departments to liaison mechanisms involving mental health nurses within EDs or direct access to acute units. On one hand, there are clinical and organisational needs pushing towards the creation of dedicated pathways; on the other hand, there are concerns that such solutions may be counterproductive and dangerous in terms of health and social inclusion. The aim of this study is to assess the opinions of Mental Health and Emergency professionals on the advantages and disadvantages of clinical and organisational pathways dedicated to patients with psychiatric disorders who visit the general ED. The study was conducted using a qualitative research approach: semi-structured interviews were carried out through purposeful sampling composed of two cohorts: Emergency and Mental Health professionals. The data were analysed using content analysis with the software Atlas.ti. Forty-five interviews were collected, and six main themes/families were identified. A certain distance in opinions between the two cohorts emerged, especially regarding the adoption of dedicated pathways. In both cohorts, but particularly in the mental health cohort, there is a fear of stigmatisation and violation of patients' rights in dedicated pathways. Both groups believe that there is a need for more specific training and greater multidisciplinarity. This study adheres to the COREQ checklist for qualitative studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14007,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Mental Health Nursing\",\"volume\":\"34 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/inm.70063\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Mental Health Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/inm.70063\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Mental Health Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/inm.70063","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在医疗保健机构中,访问急诊科(ED)的精神疾病患者的治疗仍然是一个重大问题。在过去的几十年里,已经提出了各种组织解决方案,从专门的急诊科到涉及急诊科内精神卫生护士或直接进入急症病房的联络机制。一方面,临床和组织需要推动创建专用通道;另一方面,有人担心,这种解决办法在健康和社会包容方面可能适得其反,而且是危险的。本研究的目的是评估精神卫生和急救专业人员对专门为到普通急诊科就诊的精神障碍患者提供的临床和组织途径的利弊的意见。本研究采用定性研究方法进行:通过有目的的抽样进行半结构化访谈,由两个队列组成:急诊和精神卫生专业人员。采用内容分析软件Atlas.ti对数据进行分析。收集了45个访谈,并确定了六个主题/家庭。这两个群体之间的意见出现了一定的差距,特别是在采用专用途径方面。在这两个队列中,特别是在精神卫生队列中,人们担心在专用通道中受到侮辱和侵犯患者的权利。两组人都认为有必要进行更具体的培训和更多的多学科合作。本研究遵循COREQ定性研究清单。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Psychiatric Emergency or General Emergency: Evolution or Involution? A Qualitative Study With Mental Health and Emergency Professionals

The treatment of individuals with psychiatric disorders who visit the Emergency Department (ED) remains a significant issue within healthcare organisations. Over the past decades, various organisational solutions have been proposed, ranging from dedicated Emergency Departments to liaison mechanisms involving mental health nurses within EDs or direct access to acute units. On one hand, there are clinical and organisational needs pushing towards the creation of dedicated pathways; on the other hand, there are concerns that such solutions may be counterproductive and dangerous in terms of health and social inclusion. The aim of this study is to assess the opinions of Mental Health and Emergency professionals on the advantages and disadvantages of clinical and organisational pathways dedicated to patients with psychiatric disorders who visit the general ED. The study was conducted using a qualitative research approach: semi-structured interviews were carried out through purposeful sampling composed of two cohorts: Emergency and Mental Health professionals. The data were analysed using content analysis with the software Atlas.ti. Forty-five interviews were collected, and six main themes/families were identified. A certain distance in opinions between the two cohorts emerged, especially regarding the adoption of dedicated pathways. In both cohorts, but particularly in the mental health cohort, there is a fear of stigmatisation and violation of patients' rights in dedicated pathways. Both groups believe that there is a need for more specific training and greater multidisciplinarity. This study adheres to the COREQ checklist for qualitative studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
8.90%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Mental Health Nursing is the official journal of the Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc. It is a fully refereed journal that examines current trends and developments in mental health practice and research. The International Journal of Mental Health Nursing provides a forum for the exchange of ideas on all issues of relevance to mental health nursing. The Journal informs you of developments in mental health nursing practice and research, directions in education and training, professional issues, management approaches, policy development, ethical questions, theoretical inquiry, and clinical issues. The Journal publishes feature articles, review articles, clinical notes, research notes and book reviews. Contributions on any aspect of mental health nursing are welcomed. Statements and opinions expressed in the journal reflect the views of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信