Inpatient Mental Healthcare before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Access and use of general and mental health services before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To quantify access to health services during the COVID-19 pandemic and measure the change in use between the prepandemic and the pandemic periods in a population with assessment of psychological distress or diagnosis of mental disorders.

DATA SOURCES

We developed and piloted a search syntax and adapted it to enter the following databases from 1 January 2020 to 31 March 2023: PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Epistemonikos and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We reran the searches from the end of the original search to 3 December 2024.

DESIGN

We systematically screened titles, abstracts and full texts of retrieved records.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included observational studies on any populations and regions, covering health services such as doctor visits, hospital admissions, diagnostic examinations, pharmaceutical therapies and mental health (MH) services. Only studies using validated scales to assess psychological distress or mental disorders as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We extracted data using a purposefully designed form and evaluated the studies' quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We measured the incidence rate (IR) of access to health services and the IR ratio (IRR) between the prepandemic and the pandemic periods. We calculated contacts days and catchment areas in the different periods. We used the random effects DerSimonian-Laird inverse-variance model and calculated heterogeneity with statistics I² and τ². We computed pooled IR and pooled IRR and tested the hypothesis of no variation (IRR=1).

RESULTS

We retrieved 10 014 records and examined the full text of 580 articles. We included 136 primary studies of which 44 were meta-analysed. The IR of access to services during the pandemic was 2.59 contact months per 10 000 inhabitants (IR=2.592; 95% CI: 1.301 to 5.164). We observed a reduction of 28.5% in the use of services with negligible differences by age group and type of services (IRR=0.715; 95% CI: 0.651 to 0.785). We observed significant differences in effect sizes across studies (τ2=5.44; p<0.001 and τ2=0.090; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

By considering MH, our study provides consolidated evidence and quantifies the reduction in the use of health services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023403778.

Association of Inpatient Occupational Therapy Utilization With Reduced Risk for Psychiatric Readmission Among Veterans

OBJECTIVE

The authors sought to investigate whether utilization of inpatient occupational therapy (OT) was associated with reduced risk for 30-day psychiatric readmission in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

METHODS

The authors conducted a secondary analysis of VHA medical record data for veterans who received inpatient psychiatric care from 2015 to 2020 (N=176,889). Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to model psychiatric readmission within 30 days of discharge (yes or no) as a function of inpatient psychiatric OT utilization (none, one, two, three, or four or more encounters) and other care utilization (e.g., previous psychiatric hospitalization), as well as clinical (e.g., primary diagnosis), sociodemographic (e.g., race-ethnicity), and facility (e.g., complexity) characteristics. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of findings (e.g., stratification by discharge disposition).

RESULTS

Relatively few veterans received inpatient psychiatric OT (26.2%), and 8.4% were readmitted within 30 days. Compared with veterans who did not receive inpatient psychiatric OT, those with one (OR=0.76), two (OR=0.64), three (OR=0.67), or four or more encounters (OR=0.64) were significantly (p<0.001) less likely to be readmitted within 30 days. These findings were consistent across all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Veterans who received inpatient OT services were less likely to experience psychiatric readmission. A clear dose-response relationship between inpatient psychiatric OT and readmission risk was not identified. These findings suggest that OT services may facilitate high-value inpatient psychiatric care in the VHA by preventing readmissions that stymie recovery and incur high costs. Future research may establish the causality of this relationship, informing policy regarding increased access to inpatient psychiatric OT.

Evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on medication adherence and health care utilization among individuals with psychotic disorders who are prescribed long-acting injectables (LAIs) or clozapine: A population-based study in Manitoba, Canada

BACKGROUND

Ongoing psychiatric follow-up and medication adherence improve outcomes for patients with psychotic disorders. Due to COVID-19, outpatient care may have been disrupted, impacting healthcare utilization.

METHODS

A retrospective population-wide study was conducted for adults in Manitoba, Canada. Medication adherence and healthcare utilization were examined from 2019 to 2021. The presence of a diagnosed psychotic disorder was identified in the five years before the index date in each year. The LAI and clozapine cohorts consisted of those who received at least two prescriptions in each year 180 days before the March 20th index date. The change in adherence was measured using the average Medication Possession Ratio. Healthcare utilization rates were compared using Generalized Estimating Equation models.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between LAI and clozapine discontinuation rates before and during the pandemic. In the LAI cohort, general practitioner visits decreased significantly (-3.5 %, p = 0.039) across four quarters of 2021 versus 2019. All-cause hospitalizations decreased by 16.8 % in 2020 versus 2019 (p = 0.0055), while psychiatric hospitalizations decreased by 18.7 % across four quarters in 2020 (p = 0.0052) and 13.7 % in 2021 (p = 0.0425), versus 2019 in the LAI cohort. There was a significant transition to virtual care during the first wave of COVID-19 (71 % in clozapine, 51 % in LAI cohorts). Trends in total outpatient visits and non-psychiatric hospitalizations remained stable.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 had no substantial impact on LAI and clozapine discontinuation rates for patients previously adherent. Outpatient care remained stable, with a significant proportion of visits being done virtually at the outset of the pandemic.

eHealth Use on Acute Inpatient Mental Health Units: Implementation Processes, Common Practices, and Barriers to Use

Information technology to promote health (eHealth) is an important and growing area of mental healthcare, yet little is known about the use of patient-facing eHealth in psychiatric inpatient settings. This quality improvement project examined the current practices, barriers, implementation processes, and contextual factors affecting eHealth use across multiple Veteran Health Administration (VHA) acute mental health inpatient units. Staff from units serving both voluntary and involuntary patients (n = 49 from 37 unique sites) completed surveys regarding current, desired, and barriers to use of Veteran-facing eHealth technologies. Two subsets of respondents were then interviewed (high success sites in eHealth use, n = 6; low success sites, n = 4) to better understand the context of their eHealth use. Survey responses indicated that 20% or less of Veterans were using any type of eHealth technology while inpatient. Tablets and video chat were the most desired overall and most successfully used eHealth technologies. However, many sites noted difficulty implementing these technologies (e.g., limited Wi-Fi access). Qualitative analysis of interviews revealed differences in risk/benefit analysis and implementation support between high and low success eHealth sites. Despite desired use, patient-facing eHealth technology is not regularly implemented on inpatient units due to multiple barriers (e.g., limited staffing, infrastructure needs). Successful implementation of patient-facing eHealth may require an internal champion, guidance from external supports with experience in successful eHealth use, workload balance for staff, and an overall perspective shift in the benefits to eHealth technology versus the risks.

Global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health services: A systematic review

The purpose of the review was to investigate the changes in mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic review of qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies was conducted from February 2021 to March 2022 using four databases and five languages. 29 studies reporting on mental health services in 63 countries were included. Findings were organised according to nine major topics: (1) lack of preparedness vs. timely response and flexible solutions, (2) changes in access, referrals, and admission, (3) impacts on outpatient, community and psychosocial services, (4) inpatient: reorganisation of hospital psychiatric units/acute wards, (5) diagnostic and therapeutic adaptations, (6) effects on medication, (7) infection control measures, (8), changes in patients' demands, engagement, and mental health, and (9) impacts on staff and team. Many services were closed intermittently or considerably reduced while telepsychiatric services were extensively expanded. Face-to-face services decreased, as did the work with therapeutic groups. Many inpatient units restructured their services to accommodate COVID-19 patients. While the digitalisation of services allowed for better access to services for some, restrictive measures hindered access for most. Staff experienced changes such as heightened impacts on their own mental health, burdens on patients and the pausing of professional training. Clearly, diverse findings of studies relate to different (national) contexts, type of service offered, but also to the time of the investigation, as studies noted several distinct phases of change during the pandemic. This review suggests directions for policy and service development, such as fostering community services and providing support services for particularly vulnerable populations.