{"title":"上门咨询服务:过时的时代错误还是社区精神病学外展的重要组成部分?","authors":"K Sutherby, S Srinath, G Strathdee","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper describes a retrospective audit of a domiciliary visiting service in adult psychiatry in one district over a six-month period. General practitioners requested urgent assessment visits for three-quarters of the sample population, but were not present when the consultant attended. When the referrals were compared to the official definition of a domiciliary visit, less than a third were considered to fit the criteria. The implications of these findings are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":79616,"journal":{"name":"Health trends","volume":"24 3","pages":"103-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1992-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The domiciliary consultation service: outdated anachronism or essential part of community psychiatric outreach?\",\"authors\":\"K Sutherby, S Srinath, G Strathdee\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This paper describes a retrospective audit of a domiciliary visiting service in adult psychiatry in one district over a six-month period. General practitioners requested urgent assessment visits for three-quarters of the sample population, but were not present when the consultant attended. When the referrals were compared to the official definition of a domiciliary visit, less than a third were considered to fit the criteria. The implications of these findings are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health trends\",\"volume\":\"24 3\",\"pages\":\"103-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1992-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health trends\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health trends","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The domiciliary consultation service: outdated anachronism or essential part of community psychiatric outreach?
This paper describes a retrospective audit of a domiciliary visiting service in adult psychiatry in one district over a six-month period. General practitioners requested urgent assessment visits for three-quarters of the sample population, but were not present when the consultant attended. When the referrals were compared to the official definition of a domiciliary visit, less than a third were considered to fit the criteria. The implications of these findings are discussed.