Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29073939›Full record

ArticleIsrael journal of health policy research2017

A comparison of decisions to discharge committed psychiatric patients between treating physicians and district psychiatric committees: an outcome study.

Daniel Argo, Igor Barash, Gadi Lubin, Moshe Z Abramowitz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Israel journal of health policy research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Balancing autonomy and beneficence at the time of psychiatric discharge.Israel journal of health policy research · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Daniel ArgoJerusalem Mental Health Center, Eitanim Psychiatric Hospital, Jerusalem, Israel. Daniel.argo@moh.gov.il.ORCID 0000-0002-3791-4776
Igor BarashJerusalem Mental Health Center, Eitanim Psychiatric Hospital, Jerusalem, Israel.
Gadi LubinJerusalem Mental Health Center, Jerusalem, Israel.
Moshe Z AbramowitzHebrew University-Hadassah School of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Israel Mental Health Act of 1991 stipulates a process for involuntary psychiatric hospitalization (IPH). A patient thus hospitalized may be discharged by either the treating psychiatrist (TP) or the district psychiatric committee (DPC). The decision rendered by the DPC is often at odds with the recommendation of the TP. Although much has been written about the ethical issues of restricting patients' rights and limiting their freedom, far less attention has been devoted to the psychiatric, medical, and social outcome of legal patient discharge against the doctor's recommendation.

methodsIn our study we examined the outcomes of the decisions made by the DPC using readmission data, an internationally recognized indicator of the quality of hospital care, and compared them to the outcomes of patients discharged by the TP. All IPH discharges resulting from the DPC's determination for the year 2013 (N = 972) were extracted from the Israel national register. We also collected all IPH discharges owing to the TP's decision for 2013 (N = 5788). We defined "failure" as readmission in less than 30 days, involuntary civil readmission in less than 180 days, and involuntary readmission under court order in less than 1 year.

resultsThe rehospitalization pattern was compared in the two groups of patients discharged from their psychiatric hospitalization during 2013 (index discharges) and followed up individually for a year. We found a statistically significant difference between the DPC and the TP group for each of the time frames, with the DPC group returning to IPH much more frequently than the TP group. Using cross-sectional comparison with logistic regression adjusted for age, gender, diagnosis and length of hospitalization, we found the probability of a decision failure in the TP group was significantly less with an OR of 0.7 (95% CI .586-.863), representing a 30% adjusted decrease in the probability for failure in the TP group.

conclusionsThe results we present show that the probability of decision "failure" (readmission) was found to be significantly higher in the DPC group than in the TP group. It is often assumed that IPH patients will fare better at home in their communities than in a protracted hospitalization. This is frequently the rationale for early discharge by the DPC (30.1 days vs. 75.9 DPC and TP groups, respectively). Our results demonstrate that this rationale may well be a faulty generalization.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesAdultAdvisory CommitteesChi-Square DistributionCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHospitalizationHumansIsraelLogistic ModelsMaleMental Health ServicesMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient DischargePatient ReadmissionInvoluntary hospitalizationOutcomeQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID29073939
PMCPMC5657108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.