Abstract
AimsAre Junior Trainee, Medical Seclusion Reviews complaint with MHA COP Criteria?ObjectivesAre we seeing newly secluded patients on time?Are we documenting these reviews in clinical notes?Do documented reviews meet criteria stated by the MHA COP 26.133?Are we informing Higher Trainees of the need for MDT reviews?BackgroundSeclusion is an important aspect of inpatient care. MHA COP Chapter 26 provides guidance for documenting seclusion reviews, ensuring safeguards are in place to protect patient's safety and human rights. Secluded patients require a medical review within 1 hour, and four hourly thereafter, until a higher trainee or Consultant undertake an MDT Review. In our Trust, LYPFT, trainees undertake these reviews. There is noted discrepancy in seclusion review documentation. This audit identifies our compliance with time limits, and whether documentation meets the required criteria in the MHA Code of PracticeMethodOur Sample includes all Out-of-Hour Junior Trainee Medical Seclusion Reviews between 01/01/20 and 01/04/20 at LYPFT. Seclusions were identified from on call logs, and clinical notes were reviewed for a documented seclusion review. The date and time of seclusion are recorded, whether a 1 or 4 hourly review, and the time of review. We recorded any mention of: physical health; mental state; observation levels; recent medication; medication side effects; risk to others; risk to self and the need for ongoing seclusion.Result56 episodes of seclusion were identified; all 56 had a documented medical seclusion review. 49 reviews were on time, 4 were late with a documented reason, and 3 were late without. There was documentation of the Higher Trainee being informed in 53 reviews.No seclusion reviews mentioned all MHA COP criteria. We more frequently mentioned patients’ physical health (51), psychiatric health (52) and need for seclusion (54). 46 seclusion reviews mentioned risk of harm to others; only 3 mentioned risk of self-harm. 25 seclusion reviews mentioned medication, and 5 mentioned review for side effects. 5 seclusion reviews mentioned observation levels.ConclusionOur Junior Doctor Seclusion Reviews were not meeting the MHA Code of Practice Criteria, and we believe this to largely be due to lack of awareness of the standards. As such, results have been disseminated to Junior trainees in weekly teaching. We created a medical seclusion review template, adopted by the Trust, to ensure documentation compliance with the MHA COP. Junior doctor inductions now include a presentation regarding Seclusion, the reviews and documentation. We will re-audit in 12 months.
Highlights
The main aim of this study was to investigate whether the EIT access and waiting time standard (>60% of people experiencing first episode psychosis (FEP) are treated with a NICE-approved care package within two weeks of referral) was being met within Liverpool EIT
26% of patients first contact within MerseyCare Trust was with EIT, 74% presented elsewhere. 24% instead presented to liaison psychiatry from A&E departments, 18% to the single point of access team, 9% to criminal justice liaison team (CJLT) and 9% to North West Ambulance Service triage car
29% of referrals came from the community (GP and counselling services), 15% from CRHT, 14% from CJLT, 12% from urgent care team, 9% from liaison psychiatry
Summary
The main aim of this study was to investigate whether the EIT access and waiting time standard (>60% of people experiencing first episode psychosis (FEP) are treated with a NICE-approved care package within two weeks of referral) was being met within Liverpool EIT. We wanted to understand the pathway to treatment within EIT services, identify delays in the process of triage/assessment/ MDT/medical review and implement changes to reduce delays. This study was a retrospective cross-sectional audit of all patients accepted on to the FEP pathway following MDT discussion in the Liverpool EIT Teams across May and June 2020. Case notes were analysed for delays in referral, engagement with assessment and care-coordinators, as well as prescriber review offering medication.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
