Faculty Bibliography

The widespread prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) means that inpatient psychiatric units will necessarily manage patients who have COVID-19 that is comorbid with acute psychiatric symptoms. We report a case of recurrence of respiratory symptoms and positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing in a patient on an inpatient psychiatric unit occurring 42 days after the initial positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test, 38 days after initial symptom resolution, and 30 days after the first of 3 negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests. Over the course of the admission, the patient was safely initiated on clozapine. Recent literature on COVID-19's potential recurrence and neuropsychiatric effects is reviewed and implications for the management of COVID-19 on inpatient psychiatric units are discussed. In the era of COVID-19 and our still-developing understanding of this illness, psychiatrists' role as advocates and collaborators in our patients' physical health care has become even more critical.

BACKGROUND:New York City's first case of SARS-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) disease 2019 (COVID-19) was identified on 1 March 2020, prompting rapid restructuring of hospital-based services to accommodate the increasing numbers of medical admissions. Non-essential services were eliminated but in-patient treatment of psychiatric illnesses was necessarily maintained. AIMS/OBJECTIVE:To detail the response of the NYU Langone Health in-patient psychiatric services to the COVID-19 outbreak from 1 March to 1 May 2020. METHOD/METHODS:Process improvement/quality improvement study. RESULTS:Over this time period, our two in-patient psychiatric units (57 total beds) treated 238 patients, including COVID-19-positive and -negative individuals. Testing for COVID-19 was initially limited to symptomatic patients but expanded over the 62-day time frame. In total, 122 SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests were performed in 98 patients. We observed an overall rate of COVID-19 infection of 15.6% in the patients who were tested, with an asymptomatic positive rate of 13.7%. Although phased roll-out of testing impaired the ability to fully track on-unit transmission of COVID-19, 3% of cases were clearly identified as results of on-unit transmission. CONCLUSIONS:Our experience indicates that, with appropriate precautions, patients in need of in-patient psychiatric admission who have COVID-19 can be safely managed. We provide suggested guidelines for COVID-19 management on in-patient psychiatric units which incorporate our own experiences as well as published recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: We describe a hospital-wide effort to decrease restraint and seclusion of psychiatric inpatients. Our hypotheses were that interventions could reduce the number of patients as well as patient hours in restraint and seclusion, without an increase in adverse outcomes (fights/assaults, staff injuries, and elopements). METHOD: This study was performed at an urban academic psychiatric hospital (New York State Psychiatric Institute) with 3 inpatient units totaling 58 beds. Interventions included 1) decreasing initial time in restraint or seclusion from 4 to 2 hours before a new order was required; 2) education of staff concerning identification of patients at risk of restraint or seclusion and early interventions to avoid crises; and 3) use of a coping questionnaire to assess patient preferences for dealing with agitation. Data were assessed 20 months before and 67 months following the implementation of these interventions. RESULTS: The mean number of patients restrained went from 0.35 +/- 0.6 to 0.32 +/- 0.5 patients/month; mean hours of restraint decreased from 1.7 +/- 5.2 to 1.0 +/- 2.4 hours/month. The mean number of patients secluded decreased significantly from 3.1 +/- 1.4 to 1.0 +/- 1.1 patients/month. The mean hours of seclusion decreased markedly, from 41.6 +/- 52 to 2.7 +/- 4.5 hours/month. Adverse outcomes (elopements and fights/assaults) also decreased significantly over the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions were successful in decreasing use of restraint and seclusion on both clinical and research units over more than 5 years of follow-up. Such interventions may be adapted to other settings.

OBJECTIVE: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a common psychiatric disorder with a prevalence of 1%-2% in the general population. BPD also has the potential to cause significant distress in the lives of patients with BPD and their families. The diagnosis of BPD, however, is often withheld from patients. The purpose of this article is to explore the history of diagnostic disclosure in medicine and psychiatry and then discuss reasons why clinicians may or may not disclose the diagnosis of BPD. METHODS: The authors review medical literature about diagnostic disclosure and other issues that may affect the decision to disclose a diagnosis of BPD. RESULTS: The authors discuss the historical precedents for diagnostic disclosure and reasons a clinician may not disclose the diagnosis of BPD to a patient: questions regarding the validity of BPD as a diagnosis, worries about the stigma of the diagnosis being harmful to the patient, and transference/countertransference issues common in the treatment of patients with BPD. The authors cite factors promoting disclosure, such as the ideal of patient autonomy, possibilities for psychoeducation and collaboration with the patient toward more specific and effective therapies, and the increasing availability of diagnostic information available to patients from sources other than their clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: There are compelling reasons to make the diagnosis the subject of open examination and discussion between clinician and patient, and reasons to believe that disclosure would serve to advance the patient in his or her recovery.