European Psychiatry - Volume 33 - March 2016

562 / 812

S558 24th European Congress of Psychiatry / European Psychiatry 33S (2016) S349–S805
abuse, family, school and neighbourhood violence and economic
disadvantage. General psychopathology and psychological distress
were measured using the Brief Symptom Inventory. Data was
analyzed using SPSS. Descriptive data is provided for all mea-
sured variables, and correlation between the number of childhood
adverse events and the BSI total score were calculated using the
Spearman’s rho.
Results/conclusions Since the study is currently ongoing, and data
collection will be completed by December 2015, we will only be
able to provide final results and conclusions by the time of submis-
sion of our work presentation, in March 2016. Total sample size is
expected to be in excess of 100 subjects.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV652
Knowledge of patients’ voting rights
amongst mental health professionals
working in the London Borough of
Westminster during the 2015 UK
general election
T. MacLaren ∗, J. Townell , S. Shanmugham , V. Argent ,
L. De Ridder , A. Venkataraman , M. Clarke , M. Khwaja
1 Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, General
Adult and Old Age Psychiatry, London, United Kingdom
2 Imperial College London, Faculty of Medicine, London, United
Kingdom
3 Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, General
Adult Psychiatry, London, United Kingdom
4 Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry, London, United Kingdom
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Being able to participate in elections and to vote
are important components of social inclusion; empowering people
with mental illness to have a voice.
It is important that mental health professionals understand the vot-
ing rights of adults withmental illness in order to be able to provide
appropriate advice and support.
Objectives To explore knowledge of the voting rights of adults
living with mental illness amongst mental health professionals
working in both community and inpatient settings inWestminster,
London.
Aims To understand the level of knowledge amongst mental
health professionals regarding the voting rights of patients with
mental illness in order to identify unmet training needs.
Methods A survey, in the form of a staff quiz was undertaken in
all community and inpatient teams prior to the May 2015 general
election. All multidisciplinary team members were included.
Results In total, 211 surveys were completed. Ninety-eight per-
cent of staff correctly identified that being a psychiatric inpatient
does not change an individual’s right to vote. Less than 50% of the
staff members demonstrated correct understanding of the rights
of patients detained under forensic sections, and the rights of the
homeless to vote.
Conclusions It is encouraging that knowledge of voting rights
amongst staff appeared higher in our survey than in some published
surveys. However, despite the development of a Trust Voting Rights
Policy and Educational Film prior to the 2015 general election fur-
ther staff education, particularly the rights of those detained under
forensic sections or who are homeless, is required.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV653
Difference between normal and
priority consultations on mental
health centers
C. Manso Bazús ∗, J. Valdes Valdazo , E. Garcia Fernandez ,
L.T. Velilla Diez , J. Min Kim , C. Martinez Martinez ,
M.Á. Heredero Sanz
Complejo Asistencial Universitario de León, Psiquiatria, León, Spain
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Currently, in mental health teams there is over-
load in the first consultations, therefore, patients cannot be treated
properly.
Objective This study tries to reflect the differences between pref-
erential and ordinary consultations, as well as the differences in the
delay in the support between them.
Methodology This is a retrospective observational study where
data are collected for 3 months of the first consultations that are
taken to a mental health center.
Results The study reflects that preferential or normal (ordinary)
derivation has no influence when it comes to the patient going or
not going to the consultation.
On the other hand, there are very significant differences statistically
in the waiting time between patients with normal and preferential
priority.
Conclusions According to the results observed would be advis-
able to use appropriate criteria to decide the priority of a patient’s
cares.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV654
Comparative study between
preferential consultations and most
common diagnoses
C. Manso Bazús ∗ aldes Valdazo , E. Garcia Fernandez ,
L.T. Velilla Diez , J. Min Kim , C. Martinez Martinez ,
M.Á. Heredero Sanz
Complejo Asistencial Universitario de León, Psiquiatria, León, Spain
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction To the specialized attention arrives as preferred
patients with minor diagnosis.
Objective We do a relation between the type (nor-
mal/preferential) derivation of the first consultations and their
corresponding diagnosis.
Methodology Retrospective observational study with data gath-
ered during 3 months, which handle 2 variables: on the one hand,
type of derivation and on the other, effected diagnosis.
Results The most frequent diagnosis found are adaptative dis-
orders and affective disorders, corresponding to 45.45% and 9.1%,
respectively of preferred leads.
Conclusions Almost half of preferential queries (consultations)
could be treated in first instance by primary care physicians releas-
ing mental health care burden.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.