Correlation Between Insight and Capacity to Consent to Research in Subjects With Bipolar Disorder Type I and Schizophrenia

"But I did not touch nobody!"-Patients' and nurses' perspectives and recommendations after aggression on psychiatric wards-A qualitative study

AIMS

To gain a deeper understanding of the differences in patients and staff perspectives in response to aggression and to explore recommendations on prevention.

DESIGN

Qualitative, grounded theory study.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and nurses involved in an aggressive incident. Data collection was performed from May 2016 - March 2017.

RESULTS

Thirty-one interviews were conducted concerning 15 aggressive incidents. Patients and nurses generally showed agreement on the factual course of events, there was variation in agreement on the perceived severity (PS). Patients' recommendations on prevention were mostly personally focussed, while nurses suggested general improvements.

CONCLUSION

Patients are often capable to evaluate aggression and give recommendations on prevention shortly after the incident. Patients and nurses differ in the PS of aggression. Recommendations on prevention of patients and nurses are complementary.

IMPACT

What problem did the study address? Perspectives of patients and nurses differ with respect to aggression, but how is unclear. What were the main findings? Patients and nurses generally described a similar factual course of events concerning the incident, patients often perceive the severity less than nurses. Patients are capable to give recommendations on prevention of aggressive incidents, shortly after the incident. Where and on whom will the research have impact? Factual course of events can be a common ground to start evaluating aggressive incidents and post-incident review should address the severity of incidents. Asking recommendations from patients on how to improve safety and de-escalation can lead to innovative and personal de-escalation strategies and supports patients autonomy.

Testing decision-making competency of schizophrenia participants in clinical trials. A meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

The process of assessing the decision-making capacity of potential subjects before their inclusion in clinical trials is a legal requirement and a moral obligation, as it is essential for respecting their autonomy. This issue is especially important in psychiatry patients (such as those diagnosed with schizophrenia). The primary purpose of this article was to evaluate the degree of impairment in each dimension of decision-making capacity in schizophrenia patients compared to non-mentally-ill controls, as quantified by the (MacCAT-CR) instrument. Secondary objectives were (1) to see whether enhanced consent forms are associated with a significant increase in decision-making capacity in schizophrenia patients, and (2) if decision-making capacity in schizophrenia subjects is dependent on the age, gender, or the inpatient status of the subjects.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the results obtained from three databases: ISI Web of Science, Pubmed, Scopus. Each database was scrutinised using the following keywords: "MacCAT-CR + schizophrenia", "decision-making capacity + schizophrenia", and "informed consent + schizophrenia."

RESULTS

We included 13 studies in the analysis. The effect size between the schizophrenia and the control group was significant, with a difference in means of -4.43 (-5.76; -3.1, p < 0.001) for understanding, -1.17 (-1.49, -0.84, p < 0.001) for appreciation, -1.29 (-1.79, -0.79, p < 0.001) for reasoning, and -0.05 (-0.9, -0.01, p = 0.022) for expressing a choice.

CONCLUSIONS

Even if schizophrenia patients have a significantly decreased decision-making capacity compared to non-mentally-ill controls, they should be considered as competent unless very severe changes are identifiable during clinical examination. Enhanced informed consent forms decrease the differences between schizophrenia patients and non-mentally-ill controls (except for the reasoning dimension) and should be used whenever the investigators want to include more ill patients in their clinical trials. Increased age, men gender and an increased percentage of inpatients might increase the differential of decision-making incompetence compared to non-mentally-ill subjects in various dimensions of the decision-making competence as analysed by the MacCAT-CR scale, but the small number of subjects did not allow us (except for one instance) to reach statistical significance.