The number of people over the age of 65 attending Emergency Departments (ED) in the United Kingdom (UK) is increasing. Those who attend with a mental health related problem may be referred to liaison psychiatry for assessment. Improving responsiveness and integration of liaison psychiatry in general hospital settings is a national priority. To do this psychiatry teams must be adequately resourced and organised. However, it is unknown how trends in the number of referrals of older people to liaison psychiatry teams by EDs are changing, making this difficult.

We performed a national multi-centre retrospective service evaluation, analysing existing psychiatry referral data from EDs of people over 65. Sites were selected from a convenience sample of older peoples liaison psychiatry departments. Departments from all regions of the UK were invited to participate via the RCPsych liaison and older peoples faculty email distribution lists. From departments who returned data, we combined the date and described trends in the number and rate of referrals over a 7 year period.

Referral data from up to 28 EDs across England and Scotland over a 7 year period were analysed (n = 18828 referrals). There is a general trend towards increasing numbers of older people referred to liaison psychiatry year on year. Rates rose year on year from 1.4 referrals per 1000 ED attenders (>65 years) in 2011 to 4.5 in 2019 . There is inter and intra site variability in referral numbers per 1000 ED attendances between different departments, ranging from 0.1 - 24.3.

To plan an effective healthcare system we need to understand the population it serves, and have appropriate structures and processes within it. The overarching message of this study is clear; older peoples mental health emergencies presenting in ED are common and appear to be increasingly so. Without appropriate investment either in EDs or community mental health services, this is unlikely to improve.

The data also suggest very variable inter-departmental referral rates. It is not possible to establish why rates from one department to another are so different, or whether outcomes for the population they serve are better or worse. The data does however highlight the importance of asking further questions about why the departments are different, and what impact that has on the patients they serve.

Early assessment, diagnosis and management for people living with dementia is essential, both for the patient and their carers. We recognised delays in established local pathways when patients had unplanned acute hospital admissions preventing them from attending memory diagnostic appointments. The Psychiatric Liaison Team (PLT) Memory Pathway was introduced as we had the skills and expertise to resume the process and to find new undetected patients.

Our aim was to determine how well the newly implemented PLT Memory Pathway follows the standards outlined in the National Institute of Health & Care Excellence (NICE) Clinical Guideline 97 (CG97): Assessment, management and support for people living with dementia and their carers.

A retrospective analysis of all PLT referrals from July 2018 to February 2020 (20 months) was performed to identify patients on the community memory pathway and those with possible undetected cognitive impairment. Data were collected from electronic patient records which included demographics, primary and collateral history, cognitive testing and imaging, dementia type among others. Results were analysed using Microsoft Excel.

41 patients were included (59% female). 80% of patients were referred for memory problems or confusion. 63% had previous referrals to a memory service and was on the community memory pathway at the time of the referral. 34% were on anticholinergic medication but in only 14% were this documented as reviewed. 100 % were offered and had head imaging. A finding worthy of note was the absence of any from the ethnic minority background. 63% of patients were given a memory diagnosis and 34% had anti-dementia medication started. Patients’ families were made aware of the diagnosis in 83% of cases, due to the absence of next of kin details in the patient record. Primary Care was made aware in 100% of cases; post-diagnostic support was 100%.

The PLT is well placed to bridge the service gap between the acute care trust and established community memory services when dealing with patients with dementia. A dedicated Memory Pathway has helped to close this gap and adherence to NICE CG97 standards was good, but there is room for improvement. A particular focus will be on improving documentation of anticholinergic medication review and exploration for the absence of ethnic minority patients. Aiming to achieve 100% family involvement is also recommended.

This study has been submitted to the Royal College of Psychiatrists' Faculty of Old Age Annual Conference 2021.

Psychosis is more prevalent among people in prison compared with the community. Early detection is important to optimise health and justice outcomes; for some, this may be the first time they have been clinically assessed.

Determine factors associated with a first diagnosis of psychosis in prison and describe time to diagnosis from entry into prison.

This retrospective cohort study describes individuals identified for the first time with psychosis in New South Wales (NSW) prisons (2006–2012). Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with a first diagnosis of psychosis. Cox regression was used to describe time to diagnosis from entry into prison.

Of the 38 489 diagnosed with psychosis for the first time, 1.7% (n = 659) occurred in prison. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of being diagnosed in prison (versus community) were: male gender (odds ratio (OR) = 2.27, 95% CI 1.79–2.89), Aboriginality (OR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.49–2.19), older age (OR = 1.70, 95% CI 1.37–2.11 for 25–34 years and OR = 1.63, 95% CI 1.29–2.06 for 35–44 years) and disadvantaged socioeconomic area (OR = 4.41, 95% CI 3.42–5.69). Eight out of ten were diagnosed within 3 months of reception.

Among those diagnosed with psychosis for the first time, only a small number were identified during incarceration with most identified in the first 3 months following imprisonment. This suggests good screening processes are in place in NSW prisons for detecting those with serious mental illness. It is important these individuals receive appropriate care in prison, have the opportunity to have matters reheard and possibly diverted into treatment, and are subsequently connected to community mental health services on release.

None.

With significant numbers of individuals in the criminal justice system having mental health problems, court-based diversion programmes and liaison services have been established to address this problem.

To examine the effectiveness of the New South Wales (Australia) court diversion programme in reducing re-offending among those diagnosed with psychosis by comparing the treatment order group with a comparison group who received a punitive sanction.

Those with psychoses were identified from New South Wales Ministry of Health records between 2001 and 2012 and linked to offending records. Cox regression models were used to identify factors associated with re-offending.

A total of 7743 individuals were identified as diagnosed with a psychotic disorder prior to their court finalisation date for their first principal offence. Overall, 26% of the cohort received a treatment order and 74% received a punitive sanction. The re-offending rate in the treatment order group was 12% lower than the punitive sanction group. ‘Acts intended to cause injury’ was the most common type of the first principal offence for the treatment order group compared with the punitive sanction group (48% v. 27%). Drug-related offences were more likely to be punished with a punitive sanction than a treatment order (12% v. 2%).

Among those with a serious mental illness (i.e. psychosis), receiving a treatment order by the court rather than a punitive sanction was associated with reduced risk for subsequent offending. We further examined actual mental health treatment received and found that receiving no treatment following the first offence was associated with an increased risk of re-offending and, so, highlighting the importance of treatment for those with serious mental illness in the criminal justice system.

Policymakers may wish to align healthcare payment and quality of care while minimizing unintended consequences, particularly for safety net hospitals.

To determine whether the 2008 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Conditions policy had a differential impact on targeted healthcare-associated infection rates in safety net compared with non–safety net hospitals.

Interrupted time-series design.

Nonfederal acute care hospitals that reported central line–associated bloodstream infection and ventilator-associated pneumonia rates to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Health Safety Network from July 1, 2007, through December 31, 2013.

We did not observe changes in the slope of targeted infection rates in the postpolicy period compared with the prepolicy period for either safety net (postpolicy vs prepolicy ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.84–1.09]) or non–safety net (0.99 [0.90–1.10]) hospitals. Controlling for prepolicy secular trends, we did not detect differences in an immediate change at the time of the policy between safety net and non–safety net hospitals (P for 2-way interaction, .87).

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Conditions policy did not have an impact, either positive or negative, on already declining rates of central line–associated bloodstream infection in safety net or non–safety net hospitals. Continued evaluations of the broad impact of payment policies on safety net hospitals will remain important as the use of financial incentives and penalties continues to expand in the United States.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;00(0): 1–7