Best Practices: Visions for Best Practices in Using Coercion in Mental Health Care

2012 ◽  
Vol 63 (5) ◽  
pp. 414-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey L. Geller ◽  
William M. Glazer
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 180-189
Author(s):  
Vivienne de Vogel ◽  
Petra Schaftenaar ◽  
Maartje Clercx

Purpose Continuity of forensic mental health care is important in building protective structures around a patient and has been shown to decrease risks of relapse. Realising continuity can be complicated due to restrictions from finances or legislation and difficulties in collaboration between settings. In the Netherlands, several programs have been developed to improve continuity of forensic care. It is unknown whether professionals and clients are sufficiently aware of these programs. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach The experienced difficulties and needs of professionals and patients regarding continuity of forensic care were explored by means of an online survey and focus groups. The survey was completed by 318 professionals. Two focus groups with professionals (15 participants), one focus group and one interview with patients (six participants) were conducted. Findings The overall majority (85.6 percent) reported to experience problems in continuity on a frequent basis. The three main problems are: first, limited capacity for discharge from inpatient to outpatient or sheltered living; second, collaboration between forensic and regular mental health care; and, third, limited capacity for long-term inpatient care. Only a quarter of the participants knew the existing programs. Actual implementation of these programs was even lower (3.9 percent). The top three of professionals’ needs are: better collaboration; higher capacity; more knowledge about rules and regulation. Participants of the focus groups emphasized the importance of transparent communication, timely discharge planning and education. Practical implications Gathering best practices about regional collaboration networks and developing a blueprint based on the best practices could be helpful in improving collaboration between setting in the forensic field. In addition, more use of systematic discharge planning is needed to improve continuity in forensic mental health care. It is important to communicate in an honest, transparent way to clients about their forensic mental health trajectories, even if there are setbacks or delays. More emphasis needs to be placed on communicating and implementing policy programs in daily practice and more education about legislation is needed Structured evaluations of programs aiming to improve continuity of forensic mental health care are highly needed. Originality/value Policy programs hardly reach professionals. Professionals see improvements in collaboration as top priority. Patients emphasize the human approach and transparent communication.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

Abstract As digitalization is permeating all aspects of society, questions arise as to how it can be fruitfully employed to sustain the public health goals of quality, accessibility, efficiency and equity in healthcare and on how digital interventions can contribute to tackle global public health threats. With an estimated prevalence of around 450 million people currently suffering from mental disorders and 1 in 4 people in the world affected at some point in life, mental health care and prevention is recognized by the World Health Organization as a global public health priority. In this workshop we will specifically focus on the use and impact of digital interventions in public metal health. As evidence on the impact of digital preventive interventions are accumulating in the field of mental health, we believe there is urgent need and scope: i) to present a conceptual framework that identifies when and how the different features of digitalization can support the pursue of mental health and well-being at the population and clinical level: from risk factors' identification and control, to primary and secondary prevention, to diagnosis and access to care, to compliance to treatment, ii) to retrieve, pool and critically appraise the available evidence on the adoption, application and impact of digital solutions to the above, and iii) to collect and share best practices at the European and global level that can be replicated, adapted and scaled up in different socio-demographic and epidemiological settings, for different mental health disorders and target populations. The workshop's structure and content aims at accomplishing with the above by: 1) introducing the topic of digitalization in mental health from the perspective of public health, ii) providing three original contributions on three different innovative aspects of the digitalization of public mental health (see below), iii) engaging the audience in a fruitful discussion on the data presented, stimulating the debate around current gaps in knowledge, as well as system and policy barriers to the design, implementation and evaluation of digital Interventions in public mental health. As detailed in the presentations' abstracts below, the three original contributions will, respectively focus on: 1) the current use of telemedicine for mental health care and prevention, the digital features enabling its adoption and the assessment of its impact on clinical and public health outcomes, 2) the potential offered by digital biomarkers in defining digital phenotyping so as to inform personalized prevention and care in mental health that and 3) technology and mobile health for high-risk populations with the presentation of selected best practices. Key messages Digital interventions are supporting mental health care and prevention in different settings. The impact of digital interventions for mental health needs to be measured.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-435
Author(s):  
Emily Pfender

This article uses mental health trends during the COVID-19 pandemic to question how we can leverage current technologies such as telehealth to provide better mental health care. Based on this compilation of literature, an increase in suicide rates, suicidal ideation, and mental health disorders is possible as a result of the impact of COVID-19. By increasing the use of telehealth and investigating best practices for its use, the outcome is 3-fold. We can provide preventative measures after the COVID-19 pandemic subsides, more effective care to patients during future pandemics and global crises, and reduce mental health care disparities by reaching rural Americans.


1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-275
Author(s):  
O. Lawrence ◽  
J.D. Gostin

In the summer of 1979, a group of experts on law, medicine, and ethics assembled in Siracusa, Sicily, under the auspices of the International Commission of Jurists and the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Science, to draft guidelines on the rights of persons with mental illness. Sitting across the table from me was a quiet, proud man of distinctive intelligence, William J. Curran, Frances Glessner Lee Professor of Legal Medicine at Harvard University. Professor Curran was one of the principal drafters of those guidelines. Many years later in 1991, after several subsequent re-drafts by United Nations (U.N.) Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, the text was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly as the Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and for the Improvement of Mental Health Care. This was the kind of remarkable achievement in the field of law and medicine that Professor Curran repeated throughout his distinguished career.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document