AimsTo assess follow-up of sodium levels for in-patients prescribed antidepressants in practice compare to the standard of 3 monthly sodium levels for all patients who are prescribed antidepressants and at risk of hyponatraemiaMethodA list of the 20 most recently discharged patients from Meridian Ward, an older-adult functional inpatient ward, was prepared by the team administrator on 6th May 2020.We audited the entire duration of our patient's stay on Meridian Ward (we did not include periods of their admission when they were on other wards) using the electronic notes system, Carenotes.We also checked the electronic biochemistry results system, ICE, for sodium results, and the discharge summary for mentions of fluid restriction, medications and handover to GP of sodium-checking. We also checked scanned drug charts to see if they were on antidepressants and other implicated drugs.For people with episodes of hyponatraemia, in order to retrieve further info we looked at discharge summary and searched the activity notes for the following terms“Hyponat”“sodium”“fluid restrict”“Low na”We regarded the following conditions as risk factors for hyponatraemia:cardiacmalignancyrespiratoryhypothyroidrenalhepaticstrokeWe regarded following medications as risk factors:opioidsdiureticscarbamazepinetheophyllineantipsychoticsNSAIDsPPIsACE-IARBsamiodaronedomperidonesulphonylureasResult14 of the 20 patients were taking antidepressants. Of those: 13 were eligible for regular sodium monitoring due to risk factors 11 of these had 3-monthly sodium levels during admission For only 2 of these did we make a plan for the GP to continue to monitor the sodium level in community 3 had an episode of hyponatraemia implicated antidepressants: sertraline plus mirtazapine mirtazapine (very serious episode which caused seizure) sertraline for 2 of them an appropriate plan was made 1 without a plan - a mild hyponatraemia with nothing documented in the notesConclusionDuring their admission to Meridian Ward, 85% of patients taking antidepressants who had risk factors for hyponatraemia had three-monthly sodium levels in line with the trust guidance. However, only two patients (15%) had a plan for further sodium levels in the discharge summary sent to the GP. This highlights a need for improved awareness of risk factors for hyponatraemia and, in particular, improved communication with general practitioners who are going to take over prescribing of antidepressant medications.Recommendations3 monthly Na levels for all patients with risk factorsi.e. on any antidepressant prescribed PLUS any one of:>80 yearsHistory of low sodiumAKI during admissionRelevant comorbidities (see above)>1 antidepressantOther meds that can cause hyponatraemiaMore frequent monitoring for all those with with multiple risk factors AND who are starting/increasing antidepressant:baseline sodium plus repeat after 2 and 4 weeksCommunicate to GP the need for 3-monthly sodium monitoring for those with above risk factorsRe-audit in 6-12 months’ time

AimsTo quantify how many patients were prescribed high dose antipsychotic treatment (HDAT) and establish whether guidance for monitoring HDAT was being followed in an Assertive Outreach Team.BackgroundSevere mental health disorders are associated with significant premature mortality, predominantly due to physical health conditions. Antipsychotic medications are associated with side effects, including metabolic syndrome and QT prolongation, which increase the risk of serious physical illness. HDAT is defined as when the total dose of antipsychotics prescribed exceeds 100% of the maximum BNF dose, if each dose is expressed a percentage of its maximum dose. There is limited evidence of clinical benefit with HDAT but an increased risk of side effects. Patients prescribed HDAT should therefore be monitored for side effects and clinical benefit. Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust developed a form specifically for this purpose, to be completed in addition to a physical health assessment.MethodAll patients on caseload were audited using the electronic notes. Current inpatients were excluded, as inpatient HDAT monitoring forms are attached to paper drug charts and therefore were not available for review.ResultA total of 61 patients were audited. Nine were excluded due to being inpatients. 16 were on community treatment orders and 26 were prescribed a long-acting antipsychotic injection. 10 were prescribed clozapine. The median number of medications prescribed was one. Four patients were prescribed HDAT ranging from 117-150% of the maximum BNF dose. Of these four, one had a HDAT form but this was out of date. 39 of 52 (75%) patients audited had had a physical health assessment in the past 12 months. Two of the 13 missing a physical health assessment were on HDAT.ConclusionPhysical health monitoring should be carried out for all patients on antipsychotics, but is particularly important for patients on HDAT. This audit identified a problem in both general physical health checks and HDAT monitoring. On discussion with the multi-disciplinary team a number of barriers to appropriate physical health monitoring were identified. There was a lack of awareness within the multi-disciplinary team that patients were receiving HDAT and regarding the implications for side effects. A reliable system to highlight the need for physical health checks was also missing and the team did not have sufficient equipment to perform the necessary checks. Identifying these barriers should enable improvements in physical health and HDAT monitoring which can be re-audited.

No abstract