Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T13:23:26.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Assessment and Management of Eating Disorders at Community CAMHS in South Lanarkshire: A Quality Improvement Project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2024

Tze Hui (Fifi) Phang*
Affiliation:
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom NHS Lanarkshire, Hamilton, United Kingdom
Sophie Hall
Affiliation:
NHS Lanarkshire, Hamilton, United Kingdom
Amy Woodrow
Affiliation:
NHS Lanarkshire, Hamilton, United Kingdom
Joseph Jameson
Affiliation:
NHS Lanarkshire, Hamilton, United Kingdom
Raghuram Mahalingam Krishnasamy
Affiliation:
NHS Lanarkshire, Hamilton, United Kingdom
*
*Presenting author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

An evaluation of the service and care provided to eating disordered patients referred to Tier 3 CAMHS within NHS Lanarkshire. Eating disorders are recognised as a relatively common disease with preventable mortality. The primary aim was to determine if patients with eating disorders adhere to the assessment and management as outlined in MEED and SIGN 164. The secondary aim was to scope the number of eating disordered cases to plan recruitment and training of specialist staff.

Methods

The pilot study was carried out in November 2022 and repeated in January 2024. The Electronic Patient Record and paper notes of eating disordered cases assessed in 2023 were used to audit against MEED and SIGN 164. Additional patient demographics including patient's age, sex, median BMI at initial appointment, working diagnosis and suspected co-morbidity were also collected. The service was further evaluated on its processes from source of referral, time taken to be seen, therapies offered and duration within service.

Results

A total of 46 cases were identified in the audit compared to 57 in the pilot study. Most of the cases seen in 2023 were girls in their early teens (89% between the ages 13–16). 10% have a median % BMI <80%. 15 were given a diagnosis of AN (33%), 4 with BN (9%), 4 with ARFID (9%), 2 with OSFED (4%) and 19 with no formal diagnosis (42%). There was a high level of suspected comorbidity (80%).

Referrals were mostly made by GPs (87%), followed by school (11%) and other professionals (2%). The average time taken for the initial assessment was 63 days (40% were seen within 4 weeks). 14 (30%) of cases were offered FBT only whereas 3 (7%) had CBT-E. 7 (15%) did not receive any intervention and 19 (41%) were given other therapies.

With respect to the MEED risk markers, there had been improved recording of weight changes (40% to 80%), hydration status (40% to 70%), temperature (5% to 30%), bloods, over exercising (85% to 90%), purging (75% to 85%) and self-harm behaviours (85% to 90%). However there had been reduction in the recording of BP/HR (80% to 50%), ECG (75% to 40%) and engagement with services (75% to 60%).

Conclusion

Overall, there's some improvement in assessment and management of ED cases but the standard remains inadequate. This project has helped understand the gaps in services and provisions available. Ongoing evaluation is required to help steer service development and optimise patient care.

Type
3 Quality Improvement
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.