Utility of Nonspecific Laboratory Testing for Psychiatric Patients Undergoing Medical Screening in a Military Emergency Department

Abstract

<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Introduction</jats:title> <jats:p>Psychiatric complaints account for a sizable and increasing portion of emergency department (ED) visits. Compared with other medical patients, these patients often require substantial resources because of limited specialized resources and prolonged boarding times, which can be detrimental to the safety and satisfaction of other patients. This can prompt early and indiscriminate laboratory testing to expedite early requests for admission consideration. Numerous emergency medicine literature and clinical policies already recommend against indiscriminate screening labs for these patients, yet many psychiatric services require these tests. This study further evidences the limited clinical utility and high associated costs of mandatory protocol screening labs for psychiatric patients evaluated in military EDs.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Materials and Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>A retrospective chart review of 441 active duty military patients and their families presenting to Madigan Army Medical Center’s ED who received psychiatric diagnoses underwent analysis. A 3-physician review panel evaluated each identified patient case to confirm eligibility and determine whether or not laboratory studies led to a change in patient disposition that was not identified by history, review of systems, physical exam, and known past medical history. The review was approved by the hospital’s institutional review board. Contemporary laboratory tests ordered in the evaluation of these patients included complete blood count with differential, complete metabolic panel, thyroid-stimulating hormone, serum ethanol, serum acetaminophen, serum salicylates, urine drug screening, urinalysis, urine human chorionic gonadotropin, and electrocardiograms.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Broad screening labs may have altered dispositions for 0.9% ( 4) of patients. In total, 93% (202) of admitted patients were dispositioned to a psychiatric service. Of the 15 patients admitted to a medical service, 10 involved overdoses or intoxication. One patient had anemia in addition to opioid use disorder as diagnoses and was dispositioned to a medicine service. One pediatric patient was admitted for observation only. The remaining patients had diagnoses based on physical exam and history requiring medical service admission. In total, 7 patients had unknown dispositions, of which 4 carried solely psychiatric diagnoses.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>The cumulative reimbursement costs of broad testing in the studied population were estimated at $36,325.17 and rarely altered patient disposition. Further testing does not increase the incidence of disposition altering diagnoses and is associated with increased costs. When individual state laws and the clinical assessment by the responsible emergency physician are considered, future standardized ED lab screening evaluations of psychiatric patients in military EDs may be concentrated to breathalyzer alcohol level, urine drug screen, serum salicylates, serum acetaminophen, and urine human chorionic gonadotropin.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Substance Use-related Emergency Department Visits and Resource Utilization

“…Some studies have called into question the routine practice of ordering urine drug screens for substance-related visits and laboratory studies in general for mental health-related visits, as they have rarely led to changes in management. 18 , 19 The American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) both support targeted diagnostic investigations for patients presenting with acute psychiatric symptoms, instead of routine testing. 20 , 21 However, drug testing is often required as part of initial assessment to enter treatment facilities, regardless of medical indication or emergency healthcare team preferences.…”