🛡 Ketamine/Psilocybin Retreat Medical Screening Simulator

Remote Retreat Setting Context

Retreats often run in remote jungle or mountain locations far from clinical care.

• 2–6 hr: Typical distance to hospital (placeholder estimate)
• 0–1: On-site medical staff (placeholder estimate)
• Partial: Cell/radio coverage (placeholder estimate)
• Vehicle/boat: Evacuation method (placeholder estimate)

Why location matters

Remote settings add delay before any emergency help arrives.

Placeholder: isolation is a core risk multiplier for medical events.

Facilitator vs clinical role

Facilitators are not always licensed medical providers on-site.

Terrain and access

Rough terrain can slow both onset response and outside rescue.

Reduced Medical Infrastructure Risk

Fewer emergency resources mean slower response to adverse events.

• Basic: Emergency kit level (placeholder estimate)
• Rare: Defibrillator on-site (placeholder estimate)
• Limited: IV/oxygen capability (placeholder estimate)
• Low: Trained responder ratio (placeholder estimate)

Infrastructure gap

Clinics carry equipment retreats typically do not stock.

Placeholder: infrastructure level directly shapes emergency response capability.

Substance-specific risks

Ketamine and psilocybin carry distinct cardiac and psychiatric concerns.

Mitigation options

Some retreats add nurses or telemedicine to offset gaps.

Pre-Arrival Health Questionnaire

A screening form collects history before travel or acceptance.

• ~30–50: Typical question count (placeholder estimate)
• Several: Cardiac history items (placeholder estimate)
• Several: Psychiatric history items (placeholder estimate)
• Several: Medication interaction items (placeholder estimate)

Self-report limits

Questionnaires rely on honest, complete self-disclosure.

Placeholder: thoroughness rises as more risk factors are actively surfaced.

Key domains covered

Cardiac, psychiatric, medication, and pregnancy status are typical.

Follow-up interview

A call or video screen can clarify ambiguous answers.

Cardiac/Psychiatric Red-Flag Screening

Specific answers trigger disqualifying or monitoring flags.

• e.g. arrhythmia: Cardiac red flags (placeholder example)
• e.g. psychosis hx: Psychiatric red flags (placeholder example)
• e.g. MAOI use: Medication flags (placeholder example)
• Site-defined: Flag threshold (placeholder estimate)

Cardiac flags

Uncontrolled hypertension or arrhythmia raise dosing concerns.

Placeholder: overall risk climbs sharply as flags accumulate.

Psychiatric flags

Psychosis or mania history is a common exclusion criterion.

Interaction flags

Certain medications conflict with ketamine or psilocybin.

Acceptance or Referral Decision

Combined infrastructure and risk data drive a final gate decision.

• 3: Outcome options (accept/monitor/refer)
• Infra + risk: Decision driver (combined score)
• Clinical setting: Referral target (placeholder estimate)
• Yes: Re-screen allowed (placeholder estimate)

Decision logic

Low risk and adequate infrastructure favor acceptance.

Placeholder: the gate should default to caution when data is incomplete.

Monitoring path

Borderline cases may be accepted with added supervision.

Referral path

High-risk cases are redirected to a clinical setting.