For Residents

Unspoken ethical challenges of many psychiatric consultation services

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

A psychiatric consultation service in an academic medical center usually is a robust and busy setting. In addition to expert faculty, the service is staffed by trainees (psychosomatic medicine fellows and psychiatry residents), nurse practitioners, and medical students. I have been drawn to this growing field, which is evolving hand in hand with advances in medical therapy (eg, new antineoplastic, antiretroviral, and anticonvulsant regimens) and surgical intervention (eg, heart, lung, and gut transplantation).

As a consultant, I have learned that we have an obligation to a dual clientele:

  • the patient, through an established doctor–patient relationship
  • the primary team, which requires our assistance or raises questions about management.

While working as a trainee in providing psychiatric consultative services, I have noted a number of ethical challenges that consultants face. Below are noteworthy examples.

Justice: Is less, more?

We live in an era of growing advocacy of the recognition, acceptance, and treatment of mental illness.1 However, there does not appear to be enough psychiatric providers for the American population.2 Regrettably, a timely psychiatric assessment is, for many, a unaffordable luxury; in some regions of the United States, the wait for an outpatient psychiatric appointment is longer than 6 months.3

When a patient is admitted to the hospital, admitting physicians often consider ordering a psychiatric consult if they suspect an underlying psychiatric disorder or if they would like an expert’s opinion on some matter—such as (1) medications already prescribed for the patient as an outpatient and (2) a patient’s decision-making capacity in complex situations—without reflecting on how much of a commodity this expert opinion is. (After all, in an ideal world, concerns about cost shouldn’t factor in to what we offer our patients.)

Different practitioners have different thresholds for requesting a psychiatric consultation; no clear guidelines or recommendations exist as to how to “calibrate” one’s self to be a good consultee. As psychiatrists, we rarely call for a cardiology consult just because a patient is hypertensive and takes a diuretic at home, or call in an orthopedic surgeon because a patient with a history of arthroplasty has knee pain today. Sometimes, however, it seems to me that our non-psychiatry colleagues don’t think twice to ask for our services if their patients have a history of mental illness, even if it’s well controlled.

There is no winning formula for calculating how many psychiatric providers and resources (represented by the clinical currencies of, respectively, full-time equivalents and relative value units) a consultation service should have, but efforts have been made to solve this mystery.4 Some institutions track, with different methods and variable accuracy, the number of consults they provide annually; others wing it. Lack of accuracy and standardization means that the system is prone to sacrificing quality for quantity in the provision of services, and to provide services in an inconsistent manner (think: better quality on slower days).

Nonmaleficence: Good intentions…

Within the U.S. health care system, a consulting psychiatrist must diagnose a billable condition to be reimbursed for a consult. But what if a so-called soft consult is requested and, after the evaluation, a major mental disorder that warranted our time and expertise can’t be identified?

That situation places the provider in an awkward position. Up-diagnosing might seem like a necessity to ensure reimbursement but, in a society that still stigmatizes mental illness, the health risks of charting a major mental disorder (and prescribing a vaguely warranted psychotropic) might outweigh the benefits for some patients, in the long run.

Coding systems can impact and complicate this scenario even more. We are required to comply with coding systems by providing as many predetermined historical and clinical details of any specific major mental disorder as we can document. As we become more detail-oriented, I wonder if we are losing touch with the reality of our patients’ suffering and deviating from the human emotional experience, as we focus on complying with the health care system and maximizing hospital reimbursement.

Beneficence: The care you would want for your loved ones

For me, an attractive aspect of becoming a psychiatric consultant in the medical setting was to function as a mental health ambassador, so to speak. We often evaluate patients who have never seen a psychiatrist before (eg, when there are symptoms of acute stress disorder in a trauma patient or postoperative delirium in a patient who does not have a psychiatric history). On those occasions, we have the opportunity to make an effective, long-lasting intervention with our clinical encounter, accurate diagnosis, medication recommendations, and outpatient referrals.

Pages

Recommended Reading

After-hours texting and professional boundaries
MDedge Psychiatry
Most physician practices unsure about joining ACOs
MDedge Psychiatry
FBI questions legality of telemedicine compact laws
MDedge Psychiatry
Don’t sell your practice short
MDedge Psychiatry
5 tips to surviving Meaningful Use audits
MDedge Psychiatry
Obamacare marketplace shakeout rocks Arizona, Southeast
MDedge Psychiatry
Law & Medicine: Disciplinary function of state medical boards
MDedge Psychiatry
Appeals court ruling protects marijuana doctors from prosecution
MDedge Psychiatry
Multifocal effort needed to rein in prescription prices
MDedge Psychiatry
Take back a patient who fired you? No way
MDedge Psychiatry