Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40384464›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of mental health nursing2025

Psychiatric Emergency or General Emergency: Evolution or Involution? A Qualitative Study With Mental Health and Emergency Professionals.

Camuccio Carlo Alberto, Zara Silvia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of mental health nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Camuccio Carlo AlbertoMental Health Nursing, Dimed, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1372-9653
Zara SilviaMaternal and Child Department, Hospital Treviso, Aulss 2 Marca Trevigiana, Treviso, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelEmergency Service, HospitalEmergency Services, PsychiatricMental DisordersPsychiatric NursingAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative Researchemergency treatmentmental healthnursesprejudicepsychiatrystigma

Identifiers

PMID40384464
PMCPMC12086612

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.