Closing inpatient units slowly..

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Faebinder

Slow Wave Smurf
15+ Year Member
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
3,508
Reaction score
15
Points
4,736
Location
Pennsylvania
  1. Attending Physician
So the latest one as everyone knows, University of Colorado... What do you guys think of this trend?

http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/44/1/8

University Shuts Hospital's Inpatient Psychiatric Unit
Jim Rosack
Facing high overall occupancy rates and more than a dozen boarders in its emergency department each day, the University of Colorado's hospital decides to convert its often underutilized adult psychiatric unit to medical/surgical use.

Joining the continuing national trend of shrinking availability of inpatient psychiatric care, the University of Colorado Hospital (UCH) stopped admitting adult psychiatric inpatients last month and will close its 22-bed psychiatric unit this month. The space will be remodeled to provide 18 general medical beds next spring (see No Adverse Effect on Residency Expected).

The facility (officially the University of Colorado Denver—Health Sciences Center Anschutz Inpatient Pavilion), located in the Denver suburb of Aurora, has been widely praised as a modern and technologically advanced facility. During the mid-1990s, the university, faced with a physical inability to expand its facilities and thus its services at its original health sciences campus in Denver, made the controversial decision to move the health sciences campus—including the hospital, outpatient services, and many of the affiliated academic programs—to the expansive grounds of the former Fitzsimmons Army Medical Center, which was closed in 1995.
 
I'm a little surprised to hear this, frankly. Most places I look, psychiatric services are being expanded, not taken away. It seems that in that particular hospital, the census was the issue. I sure that if they ran an 90+% filled-bed unit, the outcome might have been different.

The medical floors will be screaming for it to reopen the minute they have to start fabricating medical diagnoses to house them on their floors since they can't get them to inpatient beds...
 
Bottom line is money for better or worse.
I'm a little surprised to hear this, frankly.

I'm not.

I've seen several attendings practice in a manner that puts the unit into the red--not because they're doing the right thing, but actually the wrong thing.

I however have noticed that in general, if a psychiatrist is doing the right thing, they often times can lead their units to be in the black instead of red.

E.g. in residency, the inpatient unit was a short term care facility. If the psychiatrist is truly working with the treatment team, usually by day 3, with good contact, interviews & communication with the treatment team, you'll know your patient's diagnosis & be pretty accurate in your assessment of what's going to happen.

However I knew of one particular attending who pretty much missed treatment team all the time, ignored the staff, & pretty much just signed what a PGY-1 did. Poor care will cut profits. A correct course of treatment could've been enacted from day 2 instead of day 8. The guy's psychotic & getting Zoloft, and a lazy attending is letting that happen. Managed care starts getting ticked when these cases take too long (and that attending did get some reprimands), and IMHO in such a case, they are completely justified in doing so.

The nurse manager of the unit knew this was happening & it ticked her off because when the unit went into the red, the administration went to her, not the attendings. I actually agreed with her more often than not because the expenses were being eaten often times due attendings being passive and not keeping track of things.

As for long term--now that I'm an attending in long term, I too notice similar trends. If you for example keep a patient for longer than needed it makes life easier for the attending--if you discharge, you have to write up the discharge workup which can take about 1 hr of your time. If you keep the patient, all you got to do is write 1 note a week which takes 15 minutes. Add to that, the stabilized patients are low maintenance. When you discharge, you're opening a bed that will eventually be filled with a higher maintenance patient and you'll have to do the admission work-up that take about 1.5 hrs per patient.

Reason why I bring this up is I've seen some doctors just sit on patients who are stable & no longer need to be on inpatient, but those patients still just sit there-for months. Well of course this is my opinion, but hey, no agitation, no symptoms of psychosis, complete compliance with meds, and the guy's still there for 5 months...you tell me if the guy needs to be on inpatient.

Add to that, with the lack of psychiatrists in general, it can force inpatient units to be in a position where they cannot replace the psychiatrist that might not be leading that unit effectively.

I of course acknowledge that sometimes managed care wants them out of there sooner than needed, but in general, if you're doing your job right, and trying to get the patient out sooner--not to save & make money, but to respect the patient's freedom by trying to get them stabilized sooner so they can be in charge of their life again--in general it'll lead to more profits.
 
Hey, I'm an attending now.

The docs that aren't doing their job right fit into 2 categories.
1-aren't doing the job but aren't worth firing. They do mediocre work.
2-aren't doing the job but are doing something so callous that they must be fired--e.g. sexual relations with the patients, not even seeing patients & writing notes on them, while "double dipping"--practicing at 2 places at once.

I've noticed several attendings fitting into #1 perhaps at least 10-50% I've seen fit in this category (it varied depending where I was). The #2 category is rare, though I've seen 3 doctors so far do that. The staff has told me of several others in the past who did that.

In a big institution, there are those that use their brains to try to figure out the minimal amount of work to just get by. Its Dilbert in real life. Its unfortunate but doctors do that too. Its human nature.

The bottom line in how this relates to your post Anasazi is due to shortage of psychiatrists, several hospitals can't replace a psychiatrist who chooses to practice this way. If a hospital is in that situation, and the psyche unit is in the red-the hospital can pretty much only choose to get rid of the unit or choose to eat up the cost. The shortage of psychiatrists is great for our pay, but it can hold institutions paralyzed & under the control of someone who chooses not to do better work.

And this is what I've seen not just at 1 place but at several. I of course don't know if that's the situation in the case mentioned above (actually according to the article it seemed that they weren't able to keep their place filled leading me to think that wasn't the problem), but I have seen several places keep a psychiatrist they don't even like because finding a replacement was not easy.

inner city academic psychiatry, eh?
Seems to be a hospital budget problem, need not be related to the inner city or academics in this case.

The attending will have a major effect on the profitability of the unit. Chaos theory rings true here, but becuase most psyche units only have 1-2 attendings, there is no averaging out effect. If your department's profitability was based on the totality of say 25 doctors-there will always be bad, but the total effect is averaged out with the good & bad. For psyche units, most medical hospitals carry enough beds to only justify a small handful of doctors for inpatient. I'm not talking big institution hospitals where there's hundreds of psyche patients. I'm talking the county or university hospital. Several I've seen only needed 1-2. Its the "putting all the eggs in one basket" argument. If you got a bad one and you only needed one, and you can't replace that one, it brings the entire unit down.
 
Last edited:
The bottom line in how this relates to your post Anasazi is due to shortage of psychiatrists, several hospitals can't replace a psychiatrist who chooses to practice this way. If a hospital is in that situation, and the psyche unit is in the red-the hospital can pretty much only choose to get rid of the unit or choose to eat up the cost. The shortage of psychiatrists is great for our pay, but it can hold institutions paralyzed & under the control of someone who chooses not to do better work.

I hear this loud and clear. I too was incredibly frustrated with a couple attendings when I was a resident. Luckily, my fellowship surrounds me with more passionate and smart docs that I can actually take something from.

Complacency sets in quick I suppose, and like you said, it's probably human nature to a degree, as I've seen it in almost every field of medicine, as I'm sure you have.
 
Top Bottom