User login
Navigating the challenges of patients with substance use disorders who leave AMA
Editor’s note: Readers’ Forum is a department for correspondence from readers that is not in response to articles published in
Working closely with individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs), we’ve observed a worrisome trend of patients leaving the hospital against medical advice (AMA). This issue is not only prevalent in psychiatric settings, but also in emergency departments, medical and surgical floors, and even intensive care units.1
Compared to individuals without such disorders, individuals with SUDs—particularly those with opioid use disorders—are up to 3 times more likely to leave the hospital AMA.1,2 Leaving AMA can lead to multiple complications, including an increased risk of readmission, suboptimal treatment outcomes, and an increased use of health care resources.1-3
It is critical to understand why patients elect to leave a hospital AMA. In a qualitative study, Simon et al1 found that individuals with SUDs often leave AMA due to uncontrolled withdrawal symptoms and pain, perceived stigma and discrimination, and dissatisfaction with care. Predictors of patients leaving the hospital AMA include the severity of their drug dependence and previous negative treatment experiences.4 A systematic review found housing instability and a lack of social support influence an individual’s decision to leave AMA.5
Recommendations for managing patients who leave AMA
Enhancing your understanding of withdrawal symptoms may allow you to offer patients more effective symptom control, possibly with methadone or buprenorphine.2 Injectable opioid agonist treatment may also help to retain a patient in care. In a case report, a 47-year-old man with a severe opioid use disorder who had left the hospital AMA due to uncontrolled opioid withdrawal was readmitted, treated with IV hydromorphone, and enrolled in ongoing community injectable opioid agonist treatment.6
Clinicians must address the stigma and discrimination patients with SUDs often face in health care institutions. Additional training for clinicians to improve their understanding of these disorders and foster a more compassionate and nonjudgmental approach to care may be beneficial.
Like most medicolegal conflicts, leaving AMA is often a clinical and interpersonal problem disguised as a legal one. When assessing these patients’ decision-making capacity, we often find they are angry and dissatisfied with the care they have (or have not) received. The most useful intervention may be to restore communication between the patient and their treatment team.
Even after a patient leaves AMA, the treatment team may experience countertransference issues, such as heightened emotional reactions or biases, that could compromise their clinical judgment. Addressing these dynamics may require team debriefings, supervision, or further training in managing transference and countertransference, particularly since patients who leave AMA may return for subsequent care.7
Integrated care models, which feature close collaboration between clinicians from different specialties, can help ensure that a patient’s diverse health needs are met and reduce the likelihood of them leaving AMA. Integrated care models may be particularly effective for patients with co-occurring conditions such as HIV and SUDs.8
Implementing these recommendations can be challenging. Barriers to addressing AMA departures span several domains, including patient-specific barriers (eg, stigma and discrimination), clinical barriers (eg, lack of resources and training for clinicians), institutional hurdles (eg, systemic inefficiencies), and broader social barriers (eg, housing instability and inadequate social support). Overcoming these barriers requires a multifaceted approach involving clinicians, policymakers, and the community that considers medical, psychological, and social factors.
1. Simon R, Snow R, Wakeman S. Understanding why patients with substance use disorders leave the hospital against medical advice: a qualitative study. Subst Abus. 2020;41(4):519-525.
2. Kenne DR, Boros AP, Fischbein RL. Characteristics of opiate users leaving detoxification treatment against medical advice. J Addict Dis. 2010;29(3):383-394.
3. Mahajan RK, Gautam PL, Paul G, et al. Retrospective evaluation of patients leaving against medical advice in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2019;23(3):139-142.
4. Armenian SH, Chutuape MA, Stitzer ML. Predictors of discharges against medical advice from a short-term hospital detoxification unit. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1999;56(1):1-8.
5. Ti L, Ti L. Leaving the hospital against medical advice among people who use illicit drugs: a systematic review. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(12):e53-e59.
6. McAdam M, Brar R, Young S. Initiation of injectable opioid agonist treatment in hospital: a case report. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2020;39(2):138-141.
7. Schouten R, Weintraub BR. Legal aspects of consultation. In: Stern TA, Freudenreich O, Smith FA, et al, eds. Massachusetts General Hospital Handbook of General Hospital Psychiatry. 7th ed. Elsevier; 2018:578-579.
8. Vallecillo G, Robles MJ, Fonseca F, et al. Integrated care on leaving hospital against medical advice among HIV-infected people with substance use disorders. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2018;34(12):1044-1049.
Editor’s note: Readers’ Forum is a department for correspondence from readers that is not in response to articles published in
Working closely with individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs), we’ve observed a worrisome trend of patients leaving the hospital against medical advice (AMA). This issue is not only prevalent in psychiatric settings, but also in emergency departments, medical and surgical floors, and even intensive care units.1
Compared to individuals without such disorders, individuals with SUDs—particularly those with opioid use disorders—are up to 3 times more likely to leave the hospital AMA.1,2 Leaving AMA can lead to multiple complications, including an increased risk of readmission, suboptimal treatment outcomes, and an increased use of health care resources.1-3
It is critical to understand why patients elect to leave a hospital AMA. In a qualitative study, Simon et al1 found that individuals with SUDs often leave AMA due to uncontrolled withdrawal symptoms and pain, perceived stigma and discrimination, and dissatisfaction with care. Predictors of patients leaving the hospital AMA include the severity of their drug dependence and previous negative treatment experiences.4 A systematic review found housing instability and a lack of social support influence an individual’s decision to leave AMA.5
Recommendations for managing patients who leave AMA
Enhancing your understanding of withdrawal symptoms may allow you to offer patients more effective symptom control, possibly with methadone or buprenorphine.2 Injectable opioid agonist treatment may also help to retain a patient in care. In a case report, a 47-year-old man with a severe opioid use disorder who had left the hospital AMA due to uncontrolled opioid withdrawal was readmitted, treated with IV hydromorphone, and enrolled in ongoing community injectable opioid agonist treatment.6
Clinicians must address the stigma and discrimination patients with SUDs often face in health care institutions. Additional training for clinicians to improve their understanding of these disorders and foster a more compassionate and nonjudgmental approach to care may be beneficial.
Like most medicolegal conflicts, leaving AMA is often a clinical and interpersonal problem disguised as a legal one. When assessing these patients’ decision-making capacity, we often find they are angry and dissatisfied with the care they have (or have not) received. The most useful intervention may be to restore communication between the patient and their treatment team.
Even after a patient leaves AMA, the treatment team may experience countertransference issues, such as heightened emotional reactions or biases, that could compromise their clinical judgment. Addressing these dynamics may require team debriefings, supervision, or further training in managing transference and countertransference, particularly since patients who leave AMA may return for subsequent care.7
Integrated care models, which feature close collaboration between clinicians from different specialties, can help ensure that a patient’s diverse health needs are met and reduce the likelihood of them leaving AMA. Integrated care models may be particularly effective for patients with co-occurring conditions such as HIV and SUDs.8
Implementing these recommendations can be challenging. Barriers to addressing AMA departures span several domains, including patient-specific barriers (eg, stigma and discrimination), clinical barriers (eg, lack of resources and training for clinicians), institutional hurdles (eg, systemic inefficiencies), and broader social barriers (eg, housing instability and inadequate social support). Overcoming these barriers requires a multifaceted approach involving clinicians, policymakers, and the community that considers medical, psychological, and social factors.
Editor’s note: Readers’ Forum is a department for correspondence from readers that is not in response to articles published in
Working closely with individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs), we’ve observed a worrisome trend of patients leaving the hospital against medical advice (AMA). This issue is not only prevalent in psychiatric settings, but also in emergency departments, medical and surgical floors, and even intensive care units.1
Compared to individuals without such disorders, individuals with SUDs—particularly those with opioid use disorders—are up to 3 times more likely to leave the hospital AMA.1,2 Leaving AMA can lead to multiple complications, including an increased risk of readmission, suboptimal treatment outcomes, and an increased use of health care resources.1-3
It is critical to understand why patients elect to leave a hospital AMA. In a qualitative study, Simon et al1 found that individuals with SUDs often leave AMA due to uncontrolled withdrawal symptoms and pain, perceived stigma and discrimination, and dissatisfaction with care. Predictors of patients leaving the hospital AMA include the severity of their drug dependence and previous negative treatment experiences.4 A systematic review found housing instability and a lack of social support influence an individual’s decision to leave AMA.5
Recommendations for managing patients who leave AMA
Enhancing your understanding of withdrawal symptoms may allow you to offer patients more effective symptom control, possibly with methadone or buprenorphine.2 Injectable opioid agonist treatment may also help to retain a patient in care. In a case report, a 47-year-old man with a severe opioid use disorder who had left the hospital AMA due to uncontrolled opioid withdrawal was readmitted, treated with IV hydromorphone, and enrolled in ongoing community injectable opioid agonist treatment.6
Clinicians must address the stigma and discrimination patients with SUDs often face in health care institutions. Additional training for clinicians to improve their understanding of these disorders and foster a more compassionate and nonjudgmental approach to care may be beneficial.
Like most medicolegal conflicts, leaving AMA is often a clinical and interpersonal problem disguised as a legal one. When assessing these patients’ decision-making capacity, we often find they are angry and dissatisfied with the care they have (or have not) received. The most useful intervention may be to restore communication between the patient and their treatment team.
Even after a patient leaves AMA, the treatment team may experience countertransference issues, such as heightened emotional reactions or biases, that could compromise their clinical judgment. Addressing these dynamics may require team debriefings, supervision, or further training in managing transference and countertransference, particularly since patients who leave AMA may return for subsequent care.7
Integrated care models, which feature close collaboration between clinicians from different specialties, can help ensure that a patient’s diverse health needs are met and reduce the likelihood of them leaving AMA. Integrated care models may be particularly effective for patients with co-occurring conditions such as HIV and SUDs.8
Implementing these recommendations can be challenging. Barriers to addressing AMA departures span several domains, including patient-specific barriers (eg, stigma and discrimination), clinical barriers (eg, lack of resources and training for clinicians), institutional hurdles (eg, systemic inefficiencies), and broader social barriers (eg, housing instability and inadequate social support). Overcoming these barriers requires a multifaceted approach involving clinicians, policymakers, and the community that considers medical, psychological, and social factors.
1. Simon R, Snow R, Wakeman S. Understanding why patients with substance use disorders leave the hospital against medical advice: a qualitative study. Subst Abus. 2020;41(4):519-525.
2. Kenne DR, Boros AP, Fischbein RL. Characteristics of opiate users leaving detoxification treatment against medical advice. J Addict Dis. 2010;29(3):383-394.
3. Mahajan RK, Gautam PL, Paul G, et al. Retrospective evaluation of patients leaving against medical advice in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2019;23(3):139-142.
4. Armenian SH, Chutuape MA, Stitzer ML. Predictors of discharges against medical advice from a short-term hospital detoxification unit. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1999;56(1):1-8.
5. Ti L, Ti L. Leaving the hospital against medical advice among people who use illicit drugs: a systematic review. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(12):e53-e59.
6. McAdam M, Brar R, Young S. Initiation of injectable opioid agonist treatment in hospital: a case report. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2020;39(2):138-141.
7. Schouten R, Weintraub BR. Legal aspects of consultation. In: Stern TA, Freudenreich O, Smith FA, et al, eds. Massachusetts General Hospital Handbook of General Hospital Psychiatry. 7th ed. Elsevier; 2018:578-579.
8. Vallecillo G, Robles MJ, Fonseca F, et al. Integrated care on leaving hospital against medical advice among HIV-infected people with substance use disorders. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2018;34(12):1044-1049.
1. Simon R, Snow R, Wakeman S. Understanding why patients with substance use disorders leave the hospital against medical advice: a qualitative study. Subst Abus. 2020;41(4):519-525.
2. Kenne DR, Boros AP, Fischbein RL. Characteristics of opiate users leaving detoxification treatment against medical advice. J Addict Dis. 2010;29(3):383-394.
3. Mahajan RK, Gautam PL, Paul G, et al. Retrospective evaluation of patients leaving against medical advice in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2019;23(3):139-142.
4. Armenian SH, Chutuape MA, Stitzer ML. Predictors of discharges against medical advice from a short-term hospital detoxification unit. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1999;56(1):1-8.
5. Ti L, Ti L. Leaving the hospital against medical advice among people who use illicit drugs: a systematic review. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(12):e53-e59.
6. McAdam M, Brar R, Young S. Initiation of injectable opioid agonist treatment in hospital: a case report. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2020;39(2):138-141.
7. Schouten R, Weintraub BR. Legal aspects of consultation. In: Stern TA, Freudenreich O, Smith FA, et al, eds. Massachusetts General Hospital Handbook of General Hospital Psychiatry. 7th ed. Elsevier; 2018:578-579.
8. Vallecillo G, Robles MJ, Fonseca F, et al. Integrated care on leaving hospital against medical advice among HIV-infected people with substance use disorders. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2018;34(12):1044-1049.
Managing a COVID-19–positive psychiatric patient on a medical unit
With the COVID-19 pandemic turning the world on its head, we have seen more first-episode psychotic breaks and quick deterioration in previously stable patients. Early in the pandemic, care was particularly complicated for psychiatric patients who had been infected with the virus. Many of these patients required immediate psychiatric hospitalization. At that time, many community hospital psychiatric inpatient units did not have the capacity, staffing, or infrastructure to safely admit such patients, so they needed to be managed on a medical unit. Here, I discuss the case of a COVID-19–positive woman with psychiatric illness who we managed while she was in quarantine on a medical unit.
Case report
Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, Ms. B, a 35-year-old teacher with a history of depression, was evaluated in the emergency department for bizarre behavior and paranoid delusions regarding her family. Initial laboratory and imaging testing was negative for any potential medical causes of her psychiatric symptoms. Psychiatric hospitalization was recommended, but before Ms. B could be transferred to the psychiatric unit, she tested positive for COVID-19. At that time, our community hospital did not have a designated wing on our psychiatric unit for patients infected with COVID-19. Thus, Ms. B was admitted to the medical floor, where she was quarantined in her room. She would need to remain asymptomatic and test negative for COVID-19 before she could be transferred to the psychiatric unit.
Upon arriving at the medical unit, Ms. B was hostile and uncooperative. She frequently attempted to leave her room and required restraints throughout the day. Our consultation-liaison (CL) team was consulted to assist in managing her. During the initial interview, we noticed that she had covered all 4 walls of her room with papers filled with handwritten notes. Ms. B had cut her gown to expose her stomach and legs. She had pressured speech, tangential thinking, and was religiously preoccupied. She denied any visual and auditory hallucinations, but her persecutory delusions involving her family persisted. We believed that her signs and symptoms were consistent with a manic episode from underlying, and likely undiagnosed, bipolar I disorder that was precipitated by her COVID-19 infection.
We first addressed Ms. B’s and the staff’s safety by transferring her to a larger room with a vestibule at the end of the hallway so she had more room to walk and minimal exposure to the stimuli of the medical unit. We initiated one-on-one observation to redirect her and prevent elopement. We incentivized her cooperation with staff by providing her with paper, pencils, reading material, and phone privileges. We started oral risperidone 2 mg twice daily and lorazepam 2 mg 3 times daily for short-term behavioral control and acute treatment of her symptoms, with the goal of deferring additional treatment decisions to the inpatient psychiatry team after she was transferred to the psychiatric unit. Ms. B’s agitation and impulsivity improved. She began participating with the medical team and was eventually transferred out of our medical unit to a psychiatric unit at a different facility.
COVID-19 and psychiatric illness: Clinical concerns
While infection from COVID-19 and widespread social distancing of the general population have been linked to depression and anxiety, manic and psychotic symptoms secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic have not been well described. The association between influenza infection and psychosis has been reported since the Spanish Flu pandemic,1 but there is limited data on the association between COVID-19 and psychosis. A review of 14 studies found that 0.9% to 4% of people exposed to a virus during an epidemic or pandemic develop psychosis or psychotic symptoms.1 Psychosis was associated with viral exposure, treatments used to manage the infection (steroid therapy), and psychosocial stress. This study also found that treatment with low doses of antipsychotic medication—notably aripiprazole—seemed to have been effective.1
Nonetheless, it is important to keep in mind a thorough differential diagnosis and rule out any potential organic etiologies in a COVID-19–positive patient who presents with psychiatric symptoms.2 For Ms. B, we began by ruling out drug-induced psychosis and electrolyte imbalance, and obtained brain imaging to rule out malignancy. We considered an interictal behavior syndrome of temporal lobe epilepsy, a neuropsychiatric disorder characterized by alterations in sexual behavior, religiosity, and extensive and compulsive writing and drawing.3 Neurology was consulted to evaluate the patient and possibly use EEG to detect interictal spikes, a tall task given the patient’s restlessness and paranoia. Ultimately, we determined the patient was most likely exhibiting symptoms of previously undetected bipolar disorder.
Managing patients with psychiatric illness on a medical floor during a pandemic such as COVID-19 requires the psychiatrist to truly serve as a consultant and liaison between the patient and the treatment team.4 Clinical management should address both infection control and psychiatric symptoms.5 We visited with Ms. B frequently, provided psychoeducation, engaged her in treatment, and updated her on the treatment plan.
As the medical world continues to adjust to treating patients during the pandemic, CL psychiatrists may be tasked with managing patients with acute psychiatric illness on the medical unit while they await transfer to a psychiatric unit. A creative, multifaceted, and team-based approach is key to ensure effective care and safety for all involved.
1. Brown E, Gray R, Lo Monaco S, et al. The potential impact of COVID-19 on psychosis: a rapid review of contemporary epidemic and pandemic research. Schizophr Res. 2020;222:79-87. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2020.05.005
2. Byrne P. Managing the acute psychotic episode. BMJ. 2007;334(7595):686-692. doi:10.1136/bmj.39148.668160.80
3. Waxman SG, Geschwind N. The interictal behavior syndrome of temporal lobe epilepsy. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1975;32(12):1580-1586. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1975.01760300118011
4. Stern TA, Freudenreich O, Smith FA, et al. Psychotic patients. In: Massachusetts General Hospital: Handbook of General Hospital Psychiatry. Mosby; 1997:109-121.
5. Deshpande S, Livingstone A. First-onset psychosis in older adults: social isolation influence during COVID pandemic—a UK case series. Progress in Neurology and Psychiatry. 2021;25(1):14-18. doi:10.1002/pnp.692
With the COVID-19 pandemic turning the world on its head, we have seen more first-episode psychotic breaks and quick deterioration in previously stable patients. Early in the pandemic, care was particularly complicated for psychiatric patients who had been infected with the virus. Many of these patients required immediate psychiatric hospitalization. At that time, many community hospital psychiatric inpatient units did not have the capacity, staffing, or infrastructure to safely admit such patients, so they needed to be managed on a medical unit. Here, I discuss the case of a COVID-19–positive woman with psychiatric illness who we managed while she was in quarantine on a medical unit.
Case report
Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, Ms. B, a 35-year-old teacher with a history of depression, was evaluated in the emergency department for bizarre behavior and paranoid delusions regarding her family. Initial laboratory and imaging testing was negative for any potential medical causes of her psychiatric symptoms. Psychiatric hospitalization was recommended, but before Ms. B could be transferred to the psychiatric unit, she tested positive for COVID-19. At that time, our community hospital did not have a designated wing on our psychiatric unit for patients infected with COVID-19. Thus, Ms. B was admitted to the medical floor, where she was quarantined in her room. She would need to remain asymptomatic and test negative for COVID-19 before she could be transferred to the psychiatric unit.
Upon arriving at the medical unit, Ms. B was hostile and uncooperative. She frequently attempted to leave her room and required restraints throughout the day. Our consultation-liaison (CL) team was consulted to assist in managing her. During the initial interview, we noticed that she had covered all 4 walls of her room with papers filled with handwritten notes. Ms. B had cut her gown to expose her stomach and legs. She had pressured speech, tangential thinking, and was religiously preoccupied. She denied any visual and auditory hallucinations, but her persecutory delusions involving her family persisted. We believed that her signs and symptoms were consistent with a manic episode from underlying, and likely undiagnosed, bipolar I disorder that was precipitated by her COVID-19 infection.
We first addressed Ms. B’s and the staff’s safety by transferring her to a larger room with a vestibule at the end of the hallway so she had more room to walk and minimal exposure to the stimuli of the medical unit. We initiated one-on-one observation to redirect her and prevent elopement. We incentivized her cooperation with staff by providing her with paper, pencils, reading material, and phone privileges. We started oral risperidone 2 mg twice daily and lorazepam 2 mg 3 times daily for short-term behavioral control and acute treatment of her symptoms, with the goal of deferring additional treatment decisions to the inpatient psychiatry team after she was transferred to the psychiatric unit. Ms. B’s agitation and impulsivity improved. She began participating with the medical team and was eventually transferred out of our medical unit to a psychiatric unit at a different facility.
COVID-19 and psychiatric illness: Clinical concerns
While infection from COVID-19 and widespread social distancing of the general population have been linked to depression and anxiety, manic and psychotic symptoms secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic have not been well described. The association between influenza infection and psychosis has been reported since the Spanish Flu pandemic,1 but there is limited data on the association between COVID-19 and psychosis. A review of 14 studies found that 0.9% to 4% of people exposed to a virus during an epidemic or pandemic develop psychosis or psychotic symptoms.1 Psychosis was associated with viral exposure, treatments used to manage the infection (steroid therapy), and psychosocial stress. This study also found that treatment with low doses of antipsychotic medication—notably aripiprazole—seemed to have been effective.1
Nonetheless, it is important to keep in mind a thorough differential diagnosis and rule out any potential organic etiologies in a COVID-19–positive patient who presents with psychiatric symptoms.2 For Ms. B, we began by ruling out drug-induced psychosis and electrolyte imbalance, and obtained brain imaging to rule out malignancy. We considered an interictal behavior syndrome of temporal lobe epilepsy, a neuropsychiatric disorder characterized by alterations in sexual behavior, religiosity, and extensive and compulsive writing and drawing.3 Neurology was consulted to evaluate the patient and possibly use EEG to detect interictal spikes, a tall task given the patient’s restlessness and paranoia. Ultimately, we determined the patient was most likely exhibiting symptoms of previously undetected bipolar disorder.
Managing patients with psychiatric illness on a medical floor during a pandemic such as COVID-19 requires the psychiatrist to truly serve as a consultant and liaison between the patient and the treatment team.4 Clinical management should address both infection control and psychiatric symptoms.5 We visited with Ms. B frequently, provided psychoeducation, engaged her in treatment, and updated her on the treatment plan.
As the medical world continues to adjust to treating patients during the pandemic, CL psychiatrists may be tasked with managing patients with acute psychiatric illness on the medical unit while they await transfer to a psychiatric unit. A creative, multifaceted, and team-based approach is key to ensure effective care and safety for all involved.
With the COVID-19 pandemic turning the world on its head, we have seen more first-episode psychotic breaks and quick deterioration in previously stable patients. Early in the pandemic, care was particularly complicated for psychiatric patients who had been infected with the virus. Many of these patients required immediate psychiatric hospitalization. At that time, many community hospital psychiatric inpatient units did not have the capacity, staffing, or infrastructure to safely admit such patients, so they needed to be managed on a medical unit. Here, I discuss the case of a COVID-19–positive woman with psychiatric illness who we managed while she was in quarantine on a medical unit.
Case report
Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, Ms. B, a 35-year-old teacher with a history of depression, was evaluated in the emergency department for bizarre behavior and paranoid delusions regarding her family. Initial laboratory and imaging testing was negative for any potential medical causes of her psychiatric symptoms. Psychiatric hospitalization was recommended, but before Ms. B could be transferred to the psychiatric unit, she tested positive for COVID-19. At that time, our community hospital did not have a designated wing on our psychiatric unit for patients infected with COVID-19. Thus, Ms. B was admitted to the medical floor, where she was quarantined in her room. She would need to remain asymptomatic and test negative for COVID-19 before she could be transferred to the psychiatric unit.
Upon arriving at the medical unit, Ms. B was hostile and uncooperative. She frequently attempted to leave her room and required restraints throughout the day. Our consultation-liaison (CL) team was consulted to assist in managing her. During the initial interview, we noticed that she had covered all 4 walls of her room with papers filled with handwritten notes. Ms. B had cut her gown to expose her stomach and legs. She had pressured speech, tangential thinking, and was religiously preoccupied. She denied any visual and auditory hallucinations, but her persecutory delusions involving her family persisted. We believed that her signs and symptoms were consistent with a manic episode from underlying, and likely undiagnosed, bipolar I disorder that was precipitated by her COVID-19 infection.
We first addressed Ms. B’s and the staff’s safety by transferring her to a larger room with a vestibule at the end of the hallway so she had more room to walk and minimal exposure to the stimuli of the medical unit. We initiated one-on-one observation to redirect her and prevent elopement. We incentivized her cooperation with staff by providing her with paper, pencils, reading material, and phone privileges. We started oral risperidone 2 mg twice daily and lorazepam 2 mg 3 times daily for short-term behavioral control and acute treatment of her symptoms, with the goal of deferring additional treatment decisions to the inpatient psychiatry team after she was transferred to the psychiatric unit. Ms. B’s agitation and impulsivity improved. She began participating with the medical team and was eventually transferred out of our medical unit to a psychiatric unit at a different facility.
COVID-19 and psychiatric illness: Clinical concerns
While infection from COVID-19 and widespread social distancing of the general population have been linked to depression and anxiety, manic and psychotic symptoms secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic have not been well described. The association between influenza infection and psychosis has been reported since the Spanish Flu pandemic,1 but there is limited data on the association between COVID-19 and psychosis. A review of 14 studies found that 0.9% to 4% of people exposed to a virus during an epidemic or pandemic develop psychosis or psychotic symptoms.1 Psychosis was associated with viral exposure, treatments used to manage the infection (steroid therapy), and psychosocial stress. This study also found that treatment with low doses of antipsychotic medication—notably aripiprazole—seemed to have been effective.1
Nonetheless, it is important to keep in mind a thorough differential diagnosis and rule out any potential organic etiologies in a COVID-19–positive patient who presents with psychiatric symptoms.2 For Ms. B, we began by ruling out drug-induced psychosis and electrolyte imbalance, and obtained brain imaging to rule out malignancy. We considered an interictal behavior syndrome of temporal lobe epilepsy, a neuropsychiatric disorder characterized by alterations in sexual behavior, religiosity, and extensive and compulsive writing and drawing.3 Neurology was consulted to evaluate the patient and possibly use EEG to detect interictal spikes, a tall task given the patient’s restlessness and paranoia. Ultimately, we determined the patient was most likely exhibiting symptoms of previously undetected bipolar disorder.
Managing patients with psychiatric illness on a medical floor during a pandemic such as COVID-19 requires the psychiatrist to truly serve as a consultant and liaison between the patient and the treatment team.4 Clinical management should address both infection control and psychiatric symptoms.5 We visited with Ms. B frequently, provided psychoeducation, engaged her in treatment, and updated her on the treatment plan.
As the medical world continues to adjust to treating patients during the pandemic, CL psychiatrists may be tasked with managing patients with acute psychiatric illness on the medical unit while they await transfer to a psychiatric unit. A creative, multifaceted, and team-based approach is key to ensure effective care and safety for all involved.
1. Brown E, Gray R, Lo Monaco S, et al. The potential impact of COVID-19 on psychosis: a rapid review of contemporary epidemic and pandemic research. Schizophr Res. 2020;222:79-87. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2020.05.005
2. Byrne P. Managing the acute psychotic episode. BMJ. 2007;334(7595):686-692. doi:10.1136/bmj.39148.668160.80
3. Waxman SG, Geschwind N. The interictal behavior syndrome of temporal lobe epilepsy. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1975;32(12):1580-1586. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1975.01760300118011
4. Stern TA, Freudenreich O, Smith FA, et al. Psychotic patients. In: Massachusetts General Hospital: Handbook of General Hospital Psychiatry. Mosby; 1997:109-121.
5. Deshpande S, Livingstone A. First-onset psychosis in older adults: social isolation influence during COVID pandemic—a UK case series. Progress in Neurology and Psychiatry. 2021;25(1):14-18. doi:10.1002/pnp.692
1. Brown E, Gray R, Lo Monaco S, et al. The potential impact of COVID-19 on psychosis: a rapid review of contemporary epidemic and pandemic research. Schizophr Res. 2020;222:79-87. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2020.05.005
2. Byrne P. Managing the acute psychotic episode. BMJ. 2007;334(7595):686-692. doi:10.1136/bmj.39148.668160.80
3. Waxman SG, Geschwind N. The interictal behavior syndrome of temporal lobe epilepsy. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1975;32(12):1580-1586. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1975.01760300118011
4. Stern TA, Freudenreich O, Smith FA, et al. Psychotic patients. In: Massachusetts General Hospital: Handbook of General Hospital Psychiatry. Mosby; 1997:109-121.
5. Deshpande S, Livingstone A. First-onset psychosis in older adults: social isolation influence during COVID pandemic—a UK case series. Progress in Neurology and Psychiatry. 2021;25(1):14-18. doi:10.1002/pnp.692