Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRathbone, John
dc.date.accessioned2017-09-20T15:58:00Z
dc.date.available2017-09-20T15:58:00Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.identifier.citationHickling, F. W., Abel, W., Garner, P. & Rathbone, J. (2007). Open general medical wards versus specialist psychiatric units for acute psychoses. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (4), pp.1-16.
dc.identifier.other10.1002/14651858.CD003290.pub2
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12904/9916
dc.description.abstractBackground: As international healthcare policy has moved away from treating people with severe mental illness in large inpatient psychiatric institutions, beds for people with acute psychiatric disorders are being established in specialised psychiatric units in general hospitals. In developing countries, however, limited resources mean that it is not always possible to provide discrete psychiatric units, either in general hospitals or in the community. An alternative model of admission, used in the Caribbean, is to treat the person with acute psychosis in a general hospital ward. Objectives: To compare the outcomes for people with acute psychosis who have been admitted to open medical wards with those admitted to conventional psychiatric units. Search strategy: We searched The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's study-based register (April 2007). This register is compiled from searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, Sociofile, and many conference proceedings. Selection criteria: We would have included all relevant randomised or quasi-randomised trials, allocating anyone thought to be suffering from an acute psychotic episode to either acute management on general medical wards, or acute management in a specialist psychiatric unit. The primary outcomes of interest were length of stay in hospital and relapse. Data collection and analysis: We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we would have calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95%confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based using a fixed effects model. Main results: We didnt identify any relevant randomised trials. Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
dc.description.urihttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD003290.pub2/full
dc.formatFull text uploaded
dc.subjectHospital units
dc.subjectPsychotic disorders
dc.titleOpen general medical wards versus specialist psychiatric units for acute psychoses
dc.typeArticle
refterms.dateFOA2021-06-14T11:08:07Z
html.description.abstractBackground: As international healthcare policy has moved away from treating people with severe mental illness in large inpatient psychiatric institutions, beds for people with acute psychiatric disorders are being established in specialised psychiatric units in general hospitals. In developing countries, however, limited resources mean that it is not always possible to provide discrete psychiatric units, either in general hospitals or in the community. An alternative model of admission, used in the Caribbean, is to treat the person with acute psychosis in a general hospital ward. Objectives: To compare the outcomes for people with acute psychosis who have been admitted to open medical wards with those admitted to conventional psychiatric units. Search strategy: We searched The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's study-based register (April 2007). This register is compiled from searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, Sociofile, and many conference proceedings. Selection criteria: We would have included all relevant randomised or quasi-randomised trials, allocating anyone thought to be suffering from an acute psychotic episode to either acute management on general medical wards, or acute management in a specialist psychiatric unit. The primary outcomes of interest were length of stay in hospital and relapse. Data collection and analysis: We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we would have calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95%confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based using a fixed effects model. Main results: We didnt identify any relevant randomised trials. Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Hickling 2007 1-16.pdf
Size:
198.2Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record