Community treatment orders are not a good thing

Control in the community: A qualitative analysis of the experience of persons on conditional discharge in Hong Kong

Mandatory outpatient treatment schemes such as community treatment orders remain controversial despite being commonly used around the world. Given concerns about patient autonomy and civil liberties, such schemes need to be closely scrutinised. Though Hong Kong's mandatory outpatient treatment scheme, the conditional discharge (CD) regime, has a number of significant legal concerns, empirical research on how it operates on the ground remains limited, and data on the subjective experience of relevant stakeholders is limited to healthcare professionals. This two-part cross-sectional study, the first on the service user perspective in Hong Kong, rectifies this gap. Data was collected through a self-reported survey and semi-structured interviews. Results demonstrated that, while similar themes to those in the literature were raised, such as powerlessness, a lack of understanding about the regime and in particular their rights thereunder, concerns about restrictive aspects of the regime and poor attitudes of healthcare professionals, and in some cases positive sentiments about beneficial aspects, the Hong Kong experience differs in the significant extent to which many of these concerns are demonstrated. The insights which this data provides in relation to how the implementation of the CD regime can be improved prior to legal reform is discussed, and suggestions for the way forward are proposed.

Out-patient commitment order use in Norway: incidence and prevalence rates, duration and use of mental health services from the Norwegian Outpatient Commitment Study

BACKGROUND

Norway authorised out-patient commitment in 1961, but there is a lack of representative and complete data on the use of out-patient commitment orders.

AIMS

To establish the incidence and prevalence rates on the use of out-patient commitment in Norway, and how these vary across service areas. Further, to study variations in out-patient commitment across service areas, and use of in-patient services before and after implementation of out-patient commitment orders. Finally, to identify determinants for the duration of out-patient commitment orders and time to readmission.

METHOD

Retrospective case register study based on medical files of all patients with an out-patient commitment order in 2008-2012 in six catchment areas in Norway, covering one-third of the Norwegian population aged 18 years or more. For a subsample of patients, we recorded use of in-patient care 3 years before and after their first-ever out-patient commitment.

RESULTS

Annual incidence varied between 20.7 and 28.4, and prevalence between 36.5 and 48.9, per 100 000 population aged 18 years or above. Rates differed significantly between catchment areas. Mean out-patient commitment duration was 727 days (s.d. = 889). Use of in-patient care decreased significantly in the 3 years after out-patient commitment compared with the 3 years before. Use of antipsychotic medication through the whole out-patient commitment period and fewer in-patient episodes in the 3 years before out-patient commitment predicted longer time to readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanisms behind the pronounced variations in use of out-patient commitment between sites call for further studies. Use of in-patient care was significantly reduced in the 3 years after a first-ever out-patient commitment order was made.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

None.

Do Community Treatment Orders in Psychiatry Stand Up to Principalism: Considerations Reflected through the Prism of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Compulsory psychiatric treatment is the norm in many Western countries, despite the increasingly individualistic and autonomous approach to medical interventions. Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) are the singular best example of this, requiring community patients to accept a variety of interventions, both pharmacological and social, despite their explicit wish not to do so. The epidemiological, medical/treatment and legal intricacies of CTOs have been examined in detail, however the ethical considerations are less commonly considered. Principlism, the normative ethical code based on the principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice, underpins modern medical ethics. Conflict exists between patient centred commentary that reflects individual autonomy in decision making and the need for supported decision making, as described in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the increasing use of such coercive measures, which undermines this principle. What appears to have been lost is the analysis of whether CTOs, or any coercive measure in psychiatric practice measures up against these ethical principles. We consider whether CTOs, as an exemplar of coercive psychiatric practice, measures up against the tenets of principalism in the modern context in order to further this debate.

Rates, determinants and outcomes associated with the use of community treatment orders in young people experiencing first episode psychosis

BACKGROUND

Community treatment orders (CTOs) are a controversial form of involuntary treatment for individuals affected by mental health disorders and yet little is known about the use of CTOs in first presentations. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the rates, determinants and outcomes associated with the use of CTOs in young people with a first episode of psychosis (FEP).

METHODS

This epidemiological cohort study included all individuals aged 15-24 who presented with a FEP to the Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre (EPPIC) in Melbourne between 01.01.2011 and 31.12.13.

RESULTS

A total of 544 young people presented with a FEP during the study period and of these, 93 (17.3%) were subject to a CTO during their episode of care. A total of 69.7% of CTOs were commenced after the first three months of treatment and the median duration of CTOs was 168.5 days. Males, a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder and a concurrent substance abuse disorder were associated with the use of CTOs. Additionally, young people with more severe positive psychotic symptoms were more likely to be subject to a CTO. At the time of discharge, only 38.7% of those subject to a CTO were in education or employment compared to 65.4% of those who had not been subject to a CTO.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of CTOs are commenced after at least three months of treatment, however the optimal timing of CTO implementation needs to be determined. The poor functioning of young people on a CTO should be the focus of future interventional studies.

The legal oversight of community treatment orders: A qualitative analysis of tribunal decision-making

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been in place in various jurisdictions for over three decades, and yet are still a controversial aspect of mental health provision. One of the ethical concerns CTOs may engender is how difficult it can be to secure discharge from them, which in some jurisdictions can result in service users being subject to compulsion in the community indefinitely. Given the questions that can therefore be raised about the discharge process, it is important to understand the role of the mental health tribunal as a key safeguard in the management of CTOs. However, whilst a substantial body of literature exists on CTOs and on various aspects of tribunal practice in inpatient settings respectively, relatively little has been written about the role of the tribunal in the oversight of CTO discharge decisions. This article presents the results of an eight month ethnographic investigation into CTO use in England, focusing on the factors which contribute to tribunal decisions. A total of 62 participants were involved in the study, including 18 service users on CTOs, 36 mental health practitioners and 8 tribunal chairs. A combination of interviews, observations and documentary analysis are drawn upon to illustrate tribunal decision-making practice on CTOs. The key themes reported on are: the mediating influence of participant presentation and interaction in tribunals; tribunal framing and interpretation of insight and risk; and the importance of timing to tribunals, both in terms of the perceived stability of a service user's social circumstances, and the length of the CTO. The findings highlight the cumulative and interrelated effect of such factors on tribunal decision-making, and point to how tribunal judgements are heavily weighted towards upholding CTOs, with the implications that holds for individual rights.

Supervised community treatment in Birmingham and Solihull: first 6 months

Aims and method

To describe the first 6 months of the newly introduced community treatment orders (CTOs) in Birmingham and Solihull mental health services; to establish a clearer picture of patterns of use and some early outcomes. Computerised note systems were used to collect a range of sociodemographic and clinical data using a specially designed data collection tool.

Results

We observed higher than expected numbers of CTOs compared with previous use of Section 25 supervised discharge. Our results were consistent with international studies in showing that CTOs are typically used in males aged around 40 with a primary diagnosis of psychotic illness. Compared with the census population, Black and minority ethnic groups were overrepresented in our sample. There were high recorded rates of comorbid alcohol or substance misuse and violence. The majority of patients on CTOs were being followed up by community mental health teams or assertive outreach teams.

Clinical implications

It is difficult to draw firm conclusions at this early stage of implementation. However, there are likely to be resource implications in view of the high numbers of CTOs applied compared with Section 25 discharge. Service providers, clinicians and commissioners need to ensure CTOs are backed up by high-quality care. Further research is required into the impact of CTOs on a range of outcomes and to understand differential rates of CTO across different ethnic groups.

Community treatment orders in England and Wales: national survey of clinicians' views and use

Aims and method

To ascertain the views and experiences of psychiatrists in England and Wales regarding community treatment orders (CTOs). We mailed 1928 questionnaires to members of the Royal College of Psychiatrists.

Results

In total, 566 usable surveys were returned, providing a 29% response rate. Respondents were generally positive about the introduction of the new powers, more so than in previous UK studies. They reported that their decision-making regarding compulsion was based largely on clinical grounds.

Clinical implications

In the absence of research evidence or a professional consensus about the use of CTOs, multidisciplinary input in decision-making is essential. Further research and training are urgently needed.

Supervised community treatment: guidance for clinicians

This article describes the background to the introduction of supervised community treatment (SCT) in the 2007 amendments to the Mental Health Act 1983 for England and Wales. The evidence base for the use of SCT in the UK and in other countries to date is considered, and guidance from the literature regarding the decision to impose it is reviewed. Early local experience of SCT is described, in part through a number of fictitious vignettes. Finally, we present a set of guidelines which may be used by clinicians when considering SCT.

Supervised community treatment: 2-year follow-up study in Suffolk

Aims and method

To describe the use of community treatment orders (CTOs) and outcomes for patients placed under CTOs within the first 8 months of use in Suffolk. We performed retrospective and prospective examination of health records to collect sociodemographic and clinical measurements with a specific data-collection tool.

Results

All of the patients studied had a major psychotic mental illness. A significant proportion of the patients had a history of alcohol or substance misuse and contact with judicial services. Implementation of a CTO was associated with an increase in engagement, a decrease in the number of admissions, and increased time spent outside hospital.

Clinical implications

This small localised study indicates that supervised community treatment can have benefits for some patients. The challenge now is to examine the practice of supervised community treatment and to receive meaningful feedback from people who are subject to such treatment.

Associations between compulsory community treatment and continuity of care in a three year follow-up of the Oxford Community Treatment Order Trial (OCTET) cohort

BACKGROUND

Most studies investigating the effectiveness of Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) use readmission to hospital as the primary outcome. Another aim of introducing CTOs was to improve continuity of care. Our study was a 3-year prospective follow-up which tested for associations between CTOs and continuity of care.

METHODS

Our study sample included 333 patients recruited to the Oxford Community Treatment Order Trial (OCTET). We collected data on continuity of care using eight previously operationalized measures. We analysed the association between CTOs and continuity of care in two ways. First, we tested the association between continuity of care and OCTET randomisation arm (CTO versus voluntary care via Section 17 leave). Second, we analysed continuity of care and CTO exposure independent of randomisation; using any exposure to CTO, number of days on CTO, and proportion of outpatient days on CTO as outcomes.

RESULTS

197 (61%) patients were made subject to CTO during the 36-month follow-up. Randomisation to CTO arm was significantly associated with having a higher proportion of clinical documents copied to the user but no other measures of continuity. Having a higher proportion of outpatient days on CTO (irrespective of randomisation) was associated with fewer 60 day breaks without community contact. A sensitivity analysis found that any exposure to CTO and a higher proportion of outpatient days on CTO were associated with fewer days between community mental health team contacts and 60 day breaks without contact.

CONCLUSION

We found some evidence of an association between CTO use and better engagement with the community team in terms of increased contact and fewer breaks in care. Those with CTO experience had a higher number of inpatient admissions which may have acted as a mediator of this association. We found limited evidence for an association between CTO use and other measures of continuity of care.

Compulsory community and involuntary outpatient treatment for people with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

It is controversial whether compulsory community treatment (CCT) for people with severe mental illness (SMI) reduces health service use, or improves clinical outcome and social functioning.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of compulsory community treatment (CCT) for people with severe mental illness (SMI).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (2003, 2008, 2012, 8 November 2013, 3 June 2016). We obtained all references of identified studies and contacted authors where necessary.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of CCT compared with standard care for people with SMI (mainly schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like disorders, bipolar disorder, or depression with psychotic features). Standard care could be voluntary treatment in the community or another pre-existing form of CCT such as supervised discharge.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Authors independently selected studies, assessed their quality and extracted data. We used Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias. For binary outcomes, we calculated a fixed-effect risk ratio (RR), its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and, where possible, the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). For continuous outcomes, we calculated a fixed-effect mean difference (MD) and its 95% CI. We used the GRADE approach to create 'Summary of findings' tables for key outcomes and assessed the risk of bias of these findings.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included three studies (n = 749). Two were based in the USA and one in England. The English study had the least bias, meeting three out of the seven criteria of Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias. The two other studies met only one criterion, the majority being rated unclear.Two trials from the USA (n = 416) compared court-ordered 'outpatient commitment' (OPC) with entirely voluntary community treatment. There were no significant differences between OPC and voluntary treatment by 11 to 12 months in any of the main health service or participant level outcome indices: service use - readmission to hospital (2 RCTs, n= 416, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.21, low-quality evidence); service use - compliance with medication (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19, low-quality evidence); social functioning - arrested at least once (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.52, low-quality evidence); social functioning - homelessness (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.15, low-quality evidence); or satisfaction with care - perceived coercion (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.89, low-quality evidence). However, one trial found the risk of victimisation decreased with OPC (1 RCT, n = 264, RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.80, low-quality evidence).The other RCT compared community treatment orders (CTOs) with less intensive and briefer supervised discharge (Section 17) in England. The study found no difference between the two groups for either the main health service outcomes including readmission to hospital by 12 months (1 RCT, n = 333, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.32, moderate-quality evidence), or any of the participant level outcomes. The lack of any difference between the two groups persisted at 36 months' follow-up.Combining the results of all three trials did not alter these results. For instance, participants on any form of CCT were no less likely to be readmitted than participants in the control groups whether on entirely voluntary treatment or subject to intermittent supervised discharge (3 RCTs, n = 749, RR for readmission to hospital by 12 months 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.16 moderate-quality evidence). In terms of NNTB, it would take 142 orders to prevent one readmission. There was no clear difference between groups for perceived coercion by 12 months (3 RCTs, n = 645, RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.71, moderate-quality evidence).There were no data for adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These review data show CCT results in no clear difference in service use, social functioning or quality of life compared with voluntary care or brief supervised discharge. People receiving CCT were, however, less likely to be victims of violent or non-violent crime. It is unclear whether this benefit is due to the intensity of treatment or its compulsory nature. Short periods of conditional leave may be as effective (or non-effective) as formal compulsory treatment in the community. Evaluation of a wide range of outcomes should be considered when this legislation is introduced. However, conclusions are based on three relatively small trials, with high or unclear risk of blinding bias, and low- to moderate-quality evidence. In addition, clinical trials may not fully reflect the potential benefits of this complex intervention.

Notes on the use of randomised controlled trials to evaluate complex interventions: Community treatment orders as an illustrative case

Over the past seven decades, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have revolutionised clinical research and achieved a gold standard status. However, extending their use to evaluate complex interventions is problematic. In this paper we will demonstrate that complex intervention RCTs violate the necessary premises that govern the RCTs logic and underpin their rigour. The lack of blinding, heterogeneity of participants, as well as poor treatment standardisation and difficulty of controlling for confounders, which characterise complex intervention RCTs, can potentially be profoundly detrimental to their integrity. Proponents of this approach argue that matching "real world" circumstances, while maintaining the randomised design, enhances external validity. We counter this argument by pointing out that an inverted U relation exists between internal and external validity, and thus relaxing the experimental conditions beyond a certain threshold can potentially paradoxically render the RCT externally invalid, i.e. its results cannot be used anywhere. We shall illustrate the inappropriate use of RCTs to evaluate community treatment orders and propose an alternative epistemic model that is based on mechanistic reasoning and Cartwright's capacity concept.

Coercion in mental health: a trial of the effectiveness of community treatment orders and an investigation of informal coercion in community mental health care

Background

Coercion comprisesformal coercionorcompulsion[treatment under a section of the Mental Health Act (MHA)] andinformal coercion(a range of treatment pressures, includingleverage). Community compulsion was introduced in England and Wales as community treatment orders (CTOs) in 2008, despite equivocal evidence of effectiveness. Little is known about the nature and operation of informal coercion.

Design

The programme comprised three studies, with associated substudies: Oxford Community Treatment Order Evaluation Trial (OCTET) – a study of CTOs comprising a randomised controlled trial comparing treatment on CTO to voluntary treatment via Section 17 Leave (leave of absence during treatment under section of the MHA), with 12-month follow-up, an economic evaluation, a qualitative study, an ethical analysis, the development of a new measure of capabilities and a detailed legal analysis of the trial design; OCTET Follow-up Study – a follow-up at 36 months; and Use of Leverage Tools to Improve Adherence in community Mental Health care (ULTIMA) – a study of informal coercion comprising a quantitative cross-sectional study of leverage, a qualitative study of patient and professional perceptions, and an ethical analysis.

Participants

Participants in the OCTET Study were 336 patients with psychosis diagnoses, currently admitted involuntarily and considered for ongoing community treatment under supervision. Participants in the ULTIMA Study were 417 patients from Assertive Outreach Teams, Community Mental Health Teams and substance misuse services.

Outcomes

The OCTET Trial primary outcome was psychiatric readmission. Other outcomes included measures of hospitalisation, a range of clinical and social measures, and a newly developed measure of capabilities – the Oxford Capabilities Questionnaire – Mental Health. For the follow-up study, the primary outcome was the level of disengagement during the 36 months.

Results

Community treatment order use did not reduce the rate of readmission [(59 (36%) of 166 patients in the CTO group vs. 60 (36%) of 167 patients in the non-CTO group; adjusted relative risk 1.0 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.33)] or any other outcome. There were no differences for any subgroups. There was no evidence that it might be cost-effective. Qualitative work suggested that CTOs’ (perceived) focus on medication adherence may influence how they are experienced. No general ethical justification was found for the use of a CTO regime. At 36-month follow-up, only 19 patients (6% of 329 patients) were no longer in regular contact with services. Longer duration of compulsion was associated with longer time to disengagement (p = 0.023) and fewer periods of discontinuity (p < 0.001). There was no difference in readmission outcomes over 36 months. Patients with longer CTO duration spent fewer nights in hospital. One-third (35%) of the ULTIMA sample reported lifetime experiences of leverage, lower than in the USA (51%), but patterns of leverage experience were similar. Reporting leverage made little difference to patients’ perceived coercion. Patients’ experiences of pressure were wide-ranging and pervasive, and perceived to come from family, friends and themselves, as well as professionals. Professionals were committed to patient-centred approaches, but felt obliged to assert authority when patients relapsed. We propose a five-step framework for determining the ethical status of offers by mental health professionals and give detailed guidance for professionals about how to exercise leverage.

Conclusions

Community Treatment Orders do not deliver clinical or social functioning benefits for patients. In the absence of further trials, moves should be made to restrict or stop their use. Informal coercion is widespread and takes different forms.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73110773.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Care planning for consumers on community treatment orders: an integrative literature review

BACKGROUND

Case management is the established model for care provision in mental health and is delivered within current care philosophies of person-centred and recovery-oriented care. The fact that people with a mental illness may be forced to receive care and treatment in the community poses challenges for clinicians aiming to engage in approaches that promote shared decision-making and self-determination. This review sought to gain an in-depth understanding of stakeholders' perspectives and experiences of care planning for consumers' on CTOs.

METHODS

An integrative review method allowed for inclusion of a broad range of studies from diverse empirical sources. Systematic searches were conducted across six databases. Following appraisal, findings from included papers were coded into groups and presented against a framework of case management.

RESULTS

Forty-eight papers were included in the review. Empirical studies came from seven countries, with the majority reporting on qualitative methods. Many similarities were reported across studies. Positive gains from CTOs were usually associated with the nature of support received, highlighting the importance of the therapeutic relationship in care planning. Key gaps in care planning included a lack of connection between CTO, treatment and consumer goals and lack of implementation of focussed interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Current case management processes could be better utilised for consumers on CTOs, with exploration of how this could be achieved warranted. Workers need to be sensitive to the 'control and care' dynamic in the care planning relationship, with person-centred approaches requiring core and advanced practitioner and communication skills, including empathy and trust.

Community treatment orders: exploring the paradox of personalisation under compulsion

The introduction of supervised community treatment, delivered through community treatment orders (CTOs) in England and Wales, contrasts with the policy of personalisation, which aims to provide service users autonomy and choice over services. This article draws upon findings from a primarily qualitative study which included 72 semi-structured interviews (conducted between January and December 2012) with practitioners, service users and nearest relatives situated within a particular NHS Trust. The article also refers to a follow-on study in which 30 Approved Mental Health Practitioners were interviewed. The studies aimed to develop a better understanding of how compulsory powers are being used in the community, within a policy context that emphasises personalisation and person-centred care in service delivery. Findings from the interview data (which were analysed thematically) suggest that service users were often inadequately informed about the CTO and their legal rights. Furthermore, they tended to be offered little, or no, opportunity to make choices and have involvement in the making of the CTO and setting of conditions. Retrospectively, however, restrictions were often felt beneficial to recovery, and service users reported greater involvement in decisions at review stage. Areas of good practice are identified through which person-centred care can be better incorporated into the making of CTOs.

Community treatment orders in a Swedish county--applied as intended?

BACKGROUND

Community treatment orders (CTOs) were legally implemented in psychiatry in Sweden in 2008, both in general psychiatry and in forensic psychiatric care. A main aim with the reform was to replace long leaves from compulsory psychiatric inpatient care with CTOs. The aims of the present study were to examine the use of compulsory psychiatric care before and after the reform and if this intention of the law reform was fulfilled.

METHODS

The study was based on register data from the computerized patient administrative system of Örebro County Council. Two periods of time, two years before (I) and two years after (II) the legal change, were compared. The Swedish civic registration number was used to connect unique individuals to continuous treatment episodes comprising different forms of legal status and to identify individuals treated during both time periods.

RESULTS

The number of involuntarily admitted patients was 524 in period I and 514 in period II. CTOs were in period II used on relatively more patients in forensic psychiatric care than in general psychiatry. In all, there was a 9% decrease from period I to period II in hospital days of compulsory psychiatric care, while days on leave decreased with 60%. The number of days on leave plus days under CTOs was 26% higher in period II than the number of days on leave in period I. Among patients treated in both periods, this increase was 43%. The total number of days under any form of compulsory care (in hospital, on leave, and under CTOs) increased with five percent. Patients with the longest leaves before the reform had more days on CTOs after the reform than other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that the main intention of the legislator with introducing CTOs was fulfilled in the first two years after the reform in the studied county. At the same time the use of coercive psychiatric care outside hospital, and to some extent the total use of coercive in- and outpatient psychiatric care, increased. Adding an additional legal coercive instrument in psychiatry may increase the total use of coercion.

Use of community treatment orders in an inner-London assertive outreach service

Aims and method To compare admission rates and bed occupancy before and after the introduction of community treatment orders (CTOs) in 37 assertive outreach service patients. The effect of CTOs on treatment adherence and illicit drug use were also evaluated. The views of patients and care coordinators were obtained through a focus group. Results When CTOs were introduced, admission rates fell from 3.3 to 0.3 per year and average bed occupancy declined from 133.2 to 10.8 days per year. Treatment adherence improved from 4 (10.8%) to 31 (83.7%) patients, and an objective reduction in substance misuse was observed in 25 (67.5%) patients. Whereas patients expressed ambivalence towards CTOs, their care coordinators generally had a more positive view. Clinical implications The decline in hospital usage following the introduction of CTOs is encouraging and could reflect improved adherence and engagement through intensive case management, leading to a reduction in readmissions. However, further studies need to look at quality of life, cost-effectiveness and the impact on patients.

Community treatment orders in New Zealand: regional variability and international comparisons

OBJECTIVES

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been used in New Zealand since 1992 and are now used in most Commonwealth countries. There is little research on the rate of use of CTOs in New Zealand. This study compares the prevalence of CTO use across New Zealand's 20 health districts and makes comparisons with international prevalence rates.

METHODS

New Zealand Ministry of Health reports provided data on rates of CTO use in New Zealand between 2005 and 2011. International rates were obtained from published reports and academic literature on CTO use.

RESULTS

Rates of CTO use in New Zealand show marked and persistent regional variation over the period of data collection. National average rates increased from 58 per 100,000 in 2005 to 84 per 100,000 in 2011. Rates of use of CTOs are increasing internationally. New Zealand's CTO use is high by international comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

New Zealand's high and increasing rate of CTO use by international standards raises questions about the delivery and functioning of mental health services, and about mental health service users' experience of mental health care. The high rate of CTO use needs to be addressed as a human rights issue as well as a clinical issue.

Do we need community treatment orders in Ireland?

OBJECTIVES

Re-admissions to inpatient psychiatric care are now so frequent as to be designated the 'revolving door' phenomenon and constitute 72% of admissions to Irish inpatient psychiatric units and hospitals. It is commonly believed that treatment non-adherence with aftercare following inpatient discharge contributes to readmission. Attempts to improve adherence and reduce or shorten readmission through compulsory community treatment orders have been made in several countries including Scotland in 2005 and, from November 2008, England and Wales. Provision for conditional discharge in Ireland has already been furnished by the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 but has been compromised by the inability to impose enforcement of conditions. The paper aims to determine whether compulsory community treatment orders are effective in improving adherence and reducing re-admission and whether, in consequence, their introduction in Ireland should be considered.

METHOD

The legislative measures adopted to improve treatment adherence and thereby reduce re-admissions are presented. The evidence of their effectiveness is examined.

RESULTS

Evaluation of the effectiveness of community treatment orders is limited and hindered by confounding factors. What evidence there is does not provide convincing evidence of their utility.

CONCLUSIONS

It is concluded that there is insufficient evidence to advocate their early introduction in Ireland in civil mental health legislation. Instead a wait and see policy is suggested with critical assessment of the outcome of such developments in Scotland and England and Wales. In addition further research on the characteristics of revolving door patients in Ireland and the circumstances determining their readmission is advocated. There is an anomaly in the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 which allows of conditional discharge but does not provide for its enforcement.

Clinical stability in the community associated with long-term approved leave under the Mental Health Act 2001

Introduction We present the case of a 27-year-old man with a background diagnosis of treatment resistant schizophrenia and absent insight who for the last 3 years has been residing in a high support residential setting on approved leave under the Mental Health Act (MHA) 2001. The case demonstrates how this man achieved clinical stability in the community with the assistance of long-term involuntary admission under the MHA 2001, in contrast to the previous years of his illness in which he had suffered multiple relapses of his psychotic illness with ssociated distress, poor self-care and repeated in-patient re-admissions. We discuss the equivalent use of community treatment orders in other jurisdictions and how the judicious use of approved leave under the MHA 2001 may be used as an alternative in Ireland where community treatment orders are not currently available.

METHOD

Case Report.

CONCLUSION

The case report highlights how the use of long-term approved leave under the MHA2001 may be used as alternative in Ireland to mimic CTOs for certain difficult to treat patients with psychotic illness who would benefit from ongoing treatment, but lack capacity to engage in such treatment due to persistent symptoms and lack of insight.

Compulsory community and involuntary outpatient treatment for people with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

There is controversy as to whether compulsory community treatment (CCT) for people with severe mental illness (SMI) reduces health service use, or improves clinical outcome and social functioning.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of CCT for people with SMI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register and Science Citation Index (2003, 2008, and 2012). We obtained all references of identified studies and contacted authors where necessary. We further updated this search on the 8 November 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of CCT compared with standard care for people with SMI (mainly schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like disorders, bipolar disorder, or depression with psychotic features). Standard care could be voluntary treatment in the community or another pre-existing form of compulsory community treatment such as supervised discharge.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, assessed their quality and extracted data. We used The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. For binary outcomes, we calculated a fixed-effect risk ratio (RR), its 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where possible, the weighted number needed to treat statistic (NNT). For continuous outcomes, we calculated a fixed-effect mean difference (MD) and its 95% CI. We used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to create a 'Summary of findings' table for outcomes we rated as important and assessed the risk of bias of included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

All studies (n=3) involved patients in community settings who were followed up over 12 months (n = 752 participants).Two RCTs from the USA (total n = 416) compared court-ordered 'Outpatient Commitment' (OPC) with voluntary community treatment. OPC did not result in significant differences compared to voluntary treatment in any of the main outcome indices: health service use (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for readmission to hospital by 11-12 months 0.98 CI 0.79 to 1.21, low grade evidence); social functioning (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for arrested at least once by 11-12 months 0.97 CI 0.62 to 1.52, low grade evidence); mental state; quality of life (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for homelessness 0.67 CI 0.39 to 1.15, low grade evidence) or satisfaction with care (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for perceived coercion 1.36 CI 0.97 to 1.89, low grade evidence). However, risk of victimisation decreased with OPC (1 RCT, n = 264, RR 0.50 CI 0.31 to 0.80). Other than perceived coercion, no adverse outcomes were reported. In terms of numbers needed to treat (NNT), it would take 85 OPC orders to prevent one readmission, 27 to prevent one episode of homelessness and 238 to prevent one arrest. The NNT for the reduction of victimisation was lower at six (CI 6 to 6.5).One further RCT compared community treatment orders (CTOs) with less intensive supervised discharge in England and found no difference between the two for either the main outcome of readmission (1 RCT, n = 333, RR for readmission to hospital by 12 months 0.99 CI 0.74 to 1.32, medium grade evidence), or any of the secondary outcomes including social functioning and mental state. It was not possible to calculate the NNT. The English study met three out of the seven criteria of The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias, the others only one, the majority being rated unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CCT results in no significant difference in service use, social functioning or quality of life compared with standard voluntary care. People receiving CCT were, however, less likely to be victims of violent or non-violent crime. It is unclear whether this benefit is due to the intensity of treatment or its compulsory nature. Short periods of conditional leave may be as effective (or non-effective) as formal compulsory treatment in the community. Evaluation of a wide range of outcomes should be considered when this legislation is introduced. However, conclusions are based on three relatively small trials, with high or unclear risk of blinding bias, and evidence we rated as low to medium quality.

Tackling nonadherence in psychiatric disorders: current opinion

Nonadherence to treatment is a major challenge in all fields of medicine, and it has been claimed that increasing the effectiveness of adherence interventions may have far greater impact on the health of the population than any improvement in specific medical treatments. However, despite widespread use of terms such as adherence and compliance, there is little agreement on definitions or measurements. Nonadherence can be intermittent or continuous, voluntary or involuntary, and may be specific to single or multiple interventions, which makes reliable measurement problematic. Both direct and indirect methods of assessment have their limitations. The current literature focuses mainly on psychotic disorders. A large number of trials of various psychological, social, and pharmacologic interventions has been reported. The results are mixed, but interventions specifically designed to improve adherence with a more intensive and focused approach and interventions combining elements from different approaches such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, family-based, and community-based approaches have shown better outcomes. Pharmacologic interventions include careful drug selection, switching when a treatment is not working, dose adjustment, simplifying the treatment regimen, and the use of long-acting injections. The results for the most studied pharmacologic intervention, ie, long-acting injections, are far from clear, and there are discrepancies between randomized controlled trials, nationwide cohort studies, and mirror-image studies. Nonadherence with treatment is often paid far less attention in routine clinical practice and psychiatric training. Strategies to measure and improve adherence in clinical practice are based more on personal experience than on research evidence. This overview focuses on strategies used for improving treatment adherence in psychiatric disorders in the light of current evidence, with emphasis on public health aspects of treatment adherence and the management of nonadherence in routine clinical practice.

Effectiveness of the Community Treatment Order in streamlining psychiatric services

BACKGROUND

The implementation of the Community Treatment Order (CTO) has created controversy surrounding its beneficence.

AIMS

The study aims at examining the effectiveness of the CTO in reducing the rate and duration of revolving door admissions for patients who were made subject to this Order.

METHOD

All patients who were made subject to CTO between November 2008 and August 2009 in South Essex were involved in the study where patients acted as their own control through comparing their pre-CTO, during CTO and post-CTO's admission rate and duration.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in the rate and duration of admissions in the period during and post-CTO state.

CONCLUSIONS

The CTO proved to be effective in reducing revolving door admissions and it has a beneficial carryover effect in the post-CTO state.

Liberty or dignity: community treatment orders and rights

The use of community treatment orders (CTOs) remains controversial despite their widespread use in a number of different countries. The focus of a CTO should be on individuals with severe and enduring mental disorders, typically requiring adherence with recommended outpatient treatment in the community and requiring that they allow access to members of the clinical team for the purpose of assessment. There is no current provision for CTOs under Irish mental health legislation, although patients who are involuntarily detained under the MHA 2001 (Ireland) can be granted approved leave from hospital. This provision allows for the patient to be managed in the community setting, though, while technically on leave, they remain as inpatients detained under the MHA 2001 (Ireland). This article describes the use of CTOs and considerations relating to their implementation. There is discussion of the ethical grounds and evidence base for their use. Ethical considerations such as balancing autonomy against health needs and the utilisation of capacity principles need to be weighed by clinicians considering the use of CTOs. Though qualitative research provides some support for the use of CTOs, there remains a clear lack of robust evidence based findings to support their use in terms of hospitalisation rates, duration of illness remission and improved social functioning.

Why community compulsion became the solution - Reforming mental health law in Sweden

The aim of this article is to understand how compulsory community care (CCC) has become a solution in mental health policy in so many different legal and social contexts during the last 20 years. The recent introduction of CCC in Sweden is used as a case in point, which is then contrasted against the processes in Norway, England/Wales and New York State. In Sweden, the issue of CCC was initiated following high-profile acts of violence. Contrary to several other states, there was agreement about the (lack of) evidence about its effectiveness. Rather than focusing on dangerousness, the government proposal about CCC was framed within an ideology of integrating the disabled. The new legislation allowed for a broad range of measures to control patients at the same time as it was presented as a means to protect positive rights for patients. Compared to previous legislation in Sweden, the scope of social control has remained largely the same, although the rationale has changed - from medical treatment via community treatment and rehabilitation, to reducing the risk of violence, and then shifting back to rehabilitation in the community. The Swedish approach to CCC is similar to Norway, while New York and England/Wales have followed different routes. Differences in ideology, social control and rights orientations can be understood with reference to the general welfare and care regimes that characterize the four states.

How research ethics' protections can contribute to public policy: the case of community treatment orders

Though community treatment orders (CTOs) were first used in 1986 in Australia, debate about their clinical and ethical merits continues even today. For some, the benefits of reduced frequency and duration of involuntary hospitalizations are believed to adequately outweigh the harms of restricted liberties in community living. For others, however, such benefits are believed to be achievable by simply arranging integrated, devoted community resources sans any threat of forced re-hospitalization. In response to this enduring controversy, this article examines the ethical merits of community orders using a novel approach. "Novel" because the examination is based on research ethics and its foundational principles. When hospital and community clinicians, family members, consumer/survivors, and advocacy groups discussed the idea of amending Ontario's mental health legislation to permit CTOs in the late 1990s, evidence of their effects and efficacy was very limited. Moreover, an order was characterized much like standard pharmacological or medical therapies because the person or an appropriate substitute decision maker's consent was necessary to authorize the order or make it valid. These two factors prompted this retrospective analysis: if CTOs--as a public policy initiative--had been treated like most other promising therapies, would any different ethics-related concerns have been raised that, in turn, would have benefited the public debate and the legislature's decisions? In other words, if respected safeguards that apply to new drugs and medical devices had applied to CTOs, would anything have changed?

Compulsory community and involuntary outpatient treatment for people with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

There is controversy as to whether compulsory community treatment for people with severe mental illnesses reduces health service use, or improves clinical outcome and social functioning. Given the widespread use of such powers it is important to assess the effects of this type of legislation.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the clinical and cost effectiveness of compulsory community treatment for people with severe mental illness.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We undertook searches of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register 2003, 2008, and Science Citation Index. We obtained all references of identified studies and contacted authors of each included study.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled clinical trials of compulsory community treatment compared with standard care for people with severe mental illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably selected and quality assessed studies and extracted data. For binary outcomes, we calculated a fixed effects risk ratio (RR), its 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where possible, the weighted number needed to treat/harm statistic (NNT/H).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified two randomised clinical trials (total n = 416) of court-ordered 'Outpatient Commitment' (OPC) from the USA. We found little evidence that compulsory community treatment was effective in any of the main outcome indices: health service use (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for readmission to hospital by 11-12 months 0.98 CI 0.79 to 1.2); social functioning (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for arrested at least once by 11-12 months 0.97 CI 0.62 to 1.52); mental state; quality of life (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for homelessness 0.67 CI 0.39 to 1.15) or satisfaction with care (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for perceived coercion 1.36 CI 0.97 to 1.89). However, risk of victimisation may decrease with OPC (1 RCT, n = 264, RR 0.5 CI 0.31 to 0.8). In terms of numbers needed to treat (NNT), it would take 85 OPC orders to prevent one readmission, 27 to prevent one episode of homelessness and 238 to prevent one arrest. The NNT for the reduction of victimisation was lower at six (CI 6 to 6.5). A new search for trials in 2008 did not find any new trials that were relevant to this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compulsory community treatment results in no significant difference in service use, social functioning or quality of life compared with standard care. People receiving compulsory community treatment were, however, less likely to be victims of violent or non-violent crime. It is unclear whether this benefit is due to the intensity of treatment or its compulsory nature. Evaluation of a wide range of outcomes should be considered when this type of legislation is introduced.

Reducing the revolving door phenomenon

OBJECTIVES

De-institutionalisation and the expansion of community services have resulted in a reduction in the number of inpatient admissions in Ireland having fallen by 31% between 1986 and 2006. However, despite this, readmissions continue to account for over 70% of all admissions. The policy document A Vision for Change identified many shortcomings in the current model of provision of mental health services, making recommendations for the future development of community-based services with emphasis on outreach components such as homecare, crisis intervention and assertive outreach approaches. These recommendations are reviewed in relation to readmissions and the impact they may have on reducing the revolving door phenomenon.

METHOD

Three main intervention programmes essential to the delivery of an effective community-based service outlined and recommended by A Vision for Change, along with other pertinent factors, are discussed in relation to how they might reduce readmissions in Ireland. A series of Pearson correlations between Irish inpatient admissions rates and rates of outpatient attendances and provision of community mental health services are carried out and examined to explain possible relationships between increasing/decreasing admission rates and provision/attendances at community services. International literature is reviewed to determine the effectiveness of these intervention programmes in reducing admissions and readmissions and their relevance to the Irish situation is discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst A Vision for Change goes a long way towards advocating a more person-centred, recovery oriented and integrated model of service delivery, it is apparent from the consistently high proportion of readmissions in Ireland that there are still many shortcomings in service provision. The availability of specialised community-based programmes of care is as yet relatively uncommon in Ireland and uneven in geographical distribution. A considerable improvement in their provision, quantitatively and qualitatively, is required to impact on the revolving door phenomenon. In addition a re-configuration of existing catchment populations is required if they are to be successfully introduced and expanded.

Compulsory treatment in psychiatry

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Compulsory treatment is a common, yet controversial, practice in psychiatry. This paper reviews recent studies on the use of compulsory measures in hospital, the community and special populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Researchers continue to examine the rates and patterns of involuntary hospitalization. However, they have extended their investigations to care in the community, acknowledging it as the primary locus of treatment for most patients. Research shows that the implementation of community mental health legislation presents complex clinical and practical issues that require further investigation. Recognition that compulsory treatment is an objective event which is subjectively experienced by patients, families and clinicians has led to research investigating stakeholder views. The therapeutic relationship has been found to be an important modifier of the experience of compulsory treatment. Recent studies have also focused on specific coercive practices, such as forced medication and seclusion, and the use of these in patient subgroups, including those with eating disorders and adolescents. The debate about whether compulsory treatment is ethical continues in the literature.

SUMMARY

Compulsory treatment in psychiatry remains an ethically and clinically contentious issue. As ethical concerns are generally countered by the argument that compulsory measures can lead to beneficial clinical outcomes, further empirical investigation in this area is required.

Service-user and carer perspectives on compliance and compulsory treatment in community mental health services

This paper reports on a qualitative study analyzing service-user (SU) and carer perspectives on medication compliance and their experience of compulsory treatment. Eleven SUs and eight carers were interviewed. The research is set against the background of changes to mental health legislation in England, in the form of Supervised Community Treatment. This signals a change in community mental health practice and urges a reconsideration of concepts such as compliance, concordance and coercion. These concepts are discussed in the context of legislative changes and in relation to the perspectives of service-SUs and carers. Five themes emerged from qualitative interview data, analysed using an adapted form of grounded theory: loss of credible identity, playing the game, medicalization, therapeutic competence and incompetence and increased control. The findings suggest that SUs are initially reluctant to comply with mental health treatment, but do eventually accept the need for treatment; they also stress the significance of respectful relationships with professionals and the importance of communicative competence.

Community treatment orders and competence to consent

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between civil commitment under a Community Treatment Order (CTO) and competence to consent to treatment.

METHOD

A purposive convenience sample of 10 service users under CTOs were interviewed using the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T). Ratings were compared with the ratings of 10 matched voluntary service users.

RESULTS

Seventy percent of the CTO sample were found to be incompetent according to the MacCAT-T, compared to 20% of the comparison group (p = 0.004). The proportion of the CTO sample found to be incompetent reduces to 50% if the subscale of appreciation is excluded (p = 0.004). Most people in each group would elect to continue their current treatment if given the choice.

CONCLUSION

Findings of this study suggest that mental health law reform introducing considerations of competence could lead to a substantially different group of people being subject to CTOs. If the CTO is carefully targeted and not used excessively, it is likely to be accorded qualified acceptance for most service users for whom it is used.

Compulsory community mental health treatment: literature review

Following their introduction in the United States in the 1970s various forms of compulsory treatment in the community have been introduced internationally. Compulsory treatment in the community involves a statutory framework that mandates enforceable treatment in a community setting. Such frameworks can be categorized as preventative, least restrictive, or as having both preventative and least restrictive features. Research falls into two categories; descriptive, naturalistic studies and controlled and uncontrolled comparative studies. The research has produced equivocal results, and presents numerous methodological challenges. Where programmes have demonstrated improved outcomes debate continues as to whether these outcomes are associated with legal compulsion or enhanced service provision. Service user, family and clinician perspectives demonstrate a divergence of views within and across groups, with clinicians more strongly in support than service users. The issue of compulsory community treatment is an important one for nurses, who are often at the forefront of clinical service provision, in some cases in statutory roles. Critical reflection on the issue of compulsory community treatment requires understanding of the limitations of empirical investigations and of the various ethical and social policy issues involved. There is a need for further research into compulsory community treatment and possible alternatives.