community treatment orders
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

274
(FIVE YEARS 36)

H-INDEX

27
(FIVE YEARS 3)

BJPsych Open ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Høyer ◽  
Olav Nyttingnes ◽  
Jorun Rugkåsa ◽  
Ekaterina Sharashova ◽  
Tone Breines Simonsen ◽  
...  

Background In 2017, a capacity-based criterion was added to the Norwegian Mental Health Act, stating that those with capacity to consent to treatment cannot be subjected to involuntary care unless there is risk to themselves or others. This was expected to reduce incidence and prevalence rates, and the duration of episodes of involuntary care, in particular regarding community treatment orders (CTOs). Aims The aim was to investigate whether the capacity-based criterion had the expected impact on the use of CTOs. Method This retrospective case register study included two catchment areas serving 16% of the Norwegian population (aged ≥18). In total, 760 patients subject to 921 CTOs between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2019 were included to compare the use of CTOs 2 years before and 2 years after the legal reform. Results CTO incidence rates and duration did not change after the reform, whereas prevalence rates were significantly reduced. This was explained by a sharp increase in termination of CTOs in the year of the reform, after which it reduced and settled on a slightly higher leven than before the reform. We found an unexpected significant increase in the use of involuntary treatment orders for patients on CTOs after the reform. Conclusions The expected impact on CTO use of introducing a capacity-based criterion in the Norwegian Mental Health Act was not confirmed by our study. Given the existing challenges related to defining and assessing decision-making capacity, studies examining the validity of capacity assessments and their impact on the use of coercion in clinical practice are urgently needed.


BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabelle M. Hunt ◽  
Roger T. Webb ◽  
Pauline Turnbull ◽  
Jane Graney ◽  
Saied Ibrahim ◽  
...  

Background Community treatment orders (CTOs) enable patients to be treated in the community rather than under detention in hospital. Population-based studies of suicide among patients subject to a CTO are scarce. Aims To compare suicide rates among patients subject to a CTO with all discharged psychiatric patients and those detained for treatment but not subject to a CTO at discharge (‘CTO-eligible’ patients). Method From a national case series of patients who died by suicide within 12 months of contact with mental health services in England during 2009–2018, we estimated average annual suicide rates for all discharged patients, those on a CTO at the time of suicide, those ever treated under a CTO and CTO-eligible patients. Results Suicide rates for patients on a CTO at the time of suicide (191.3 per 100 000 patients) were lower than all discharged patients (482.3 per 100 000 discharges). Suicide rates were similar in those ever treated under a CTO (350.1 per 100 000 CTOs issued) and in CTO-eligible patients (382.9 per 100 000 discharges). Suicide rates within 12 months of discharge were higher in persons ever under a CTO (205.1 per 100 000 CTOs issued) than CTO-eligible patients (161.5 per 100 000 discharges), but this difference was reversed for rates after 12 months of discharge (153.2 per 100 000 CTOs issued v. 223.4 per 100 000 discharges). Conclusions CTOs may be effective in reducing suicide risk. The relative benefits of CTOs and intensive aftercare may be time-dependent, with the benefit of a CTO being less before 12 months after discharge but greater thereafter. CTO utilisation requires a careful balancing of patient safety versus autonomy.


2021 ◽  
pp. 000486742110360
Author(s):  
Shuichi Suetani ◽  
Steve Kisely ◽  
Stephen Parker ◽  
Anna Waterreus ◽  
Vera A Morgan ◽  
...  

Objective: Existing evidence on factors associated with community treatment order placement is largely restricted to administrative data. We utilised the data from a large nationally representative sample to compare the demographic, clinical, social functioning, substance use and service utilisation profiles of people living with psychosis under community treatment orders with those who were not. Methods: Participants were grouped based on whether they had been subject to a community treatment order in the past 12 months or not. We conducted logistic regressions to examine demographic, clinical, social functioning, substance use and service utilisation profiles associated with the two groups. Results: People who had recently been subject to community treatment orders were more likely to be treated with long-acting injectable antipsychotics and lacked insight but were less likely to report suicidal ideation. They also had higher psychiatric inpatient admission rates but a lower frequency of general practitioner visits. Conclusion: People on community treatment orders in Australia may differ from those who are not under a community treatment order in their treatment needs. Resources and care provision must match the needs of this particularly vulnerable group.


BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S94-S95
Author(s):  
Sambavi Navaratnarajah ◽  
Riya Basu ◽  
Syed Rashid

AimsTo ascertain if CTOs ensure that patients are effectively treated in the community and maintain stability in their mental health.If a patient requires recall(+/- revocation) that this is done in a timely fashion in according to the 1983 Mental Health Act.BackgroundA number of studies have been inconclusive in determining the benefits of CTOs in reducing the re-admissions of “revolving door” patients In Assertive Outreach (AO). It is felt that CTOs have reduced readmission of patients due to the intensive input from community teams, decreased recall and subsequent revocation. Those admitted are thought to require fewer inpatient days. It is clear that many patients who require recall following non-engagement, non-compliance, will accept medication following RC review. However at present in BSMHFT patients can only be recalled if they are allocated a bed. Due to the national bed shortage, this has resulted in delays following decision to recall and thus early and effective treatment for patients. In this aspect it defeats the role of the CTO as per the 2007 MHA.MethodCTO data from 1st April 2018 to 31st March 2019 was obtained from all 6 AOT's in BSMHFT. The following factors were considered; 1.Time between decision to recall by RC and recall to inpatient facility2.Number of recalls converted to revocations3.Number of inpatient bed days if revoked4.Number of admissions on CTO5.Patient/family agreement of CTOResult98 CTO patients were recorded over this period. 19 out of 26 recalls had recall dates documented. 10 recalls were revoked due to relapse of mental illness. Average days from RC recall decision to actual recall or cancellation was 63.89 days. Main reasons for delay were bed unavailability and execution of warrant.Following revocation, average inpatient bed days was 103.71. 41% of families agreed with CTOs, 36% of patients contested their CTO.ConclusionOver a quarter of patients on CTO were recalled to hospital however, less than half of these had their CTO revoked. The remainder accepted treatment following urgent community review whilst on the bed list. Evidently the majority of patients didn't need admission. With the ongoing bed crisis, alternative avenues need to be sought to ensure prompt treatment and prevent relapse.A CTO suite designed for recall could be the solution for the future.


BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S233-S234
Author(s):  
Mohammed Al-Uzri ◽  
Zena Harvey ◽  
Fabida Noushad ◽  
Chinyere Iheonu ◽  
Mohammed Abbas

AimsTo examine the impact of using Communty Treatment Orders (CTO) of the Mental Health Act on use of inpatient care in Assertive Outreach team.BackgroundCurrently there is little evidence of the efficacy of community treatment orders (CTOs), and in particular with patients who use the Assertive Outreach service. One large randomised controlled study found no impact on use of inpatient care while a naturalistc study found significant impact.MethodOur primary outcome was the number of admissions with and without a CTO comparing each patient with themselves before CTO and under CTO(“mirror-image”). Our secondary outcomes were the number of bed days, and the percentage of missed community visits post-discharge. We also looked at the potential cost savings of a reduction in inpatient bed usage.ResultAll the 63 patients studied over period of 6 years had a severe and enduring mental illness. The use of a CTO was linked to a significant reduction in the number of admissions (mean difference = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.53–1.25, P < 0.0001) and bed days (mean difference = 158.65, 95% CI = 102.21–215.09, P < 0.0001) There was no significant difference in the percentage of missed community visits post-discharge. Looking at the costs, an average cost for an inpatient Assertive Outreach bed per day in the local Trust was £250, and there were 8145 bed days saved in total, making a potential saving of just over £2million, during the study period.ConclusionThis study suggests that the implementation of CTOs using clinical judgment and knowledge of patients can significantly reduce the bed usage of Assertive Outreach patients. The financial implications of CTOs need to be reviewed further, but this study does suggest that the implementation of CTOs is a cost-effective intervention and is economically advantageous to the local Trust.


2020 ◽  
pp. 000486742095428
Author(s):  
Steve Kisely ◽  
Dong Yu ◽  
Saki Maehashi ◽  
Dan Siskind

Objectives: Australia and New Zealand have some of the highest rates of compulsory community treatment order use worldwide. There are also concerns that people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds may have higher rates of community treatment orders. We therefore assessed the health service, clinical and psychosocial outcomes of compulsory community treatment and explored if culturally and linguistically diverse, indigenous status or other factors predicted community treatment orders. Methods: We searched the following databases from inception to January 2020: PubMed/Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We included any study conducted in Australia or New Zealand that compared people on community treatment orders for severe mental illness with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. Two reviewers independently extracted data, assessing study quality using Joanna Briggs Institute scales. Results: A total of 31 publications from 12 studies met inclusion criteria, of which 24 publications could be included in a meta-analysis. Only one was from New Zealand. People who were male, single and not engaged in work, study or home duties were significantly more likely to be subject to a community treatment order. In addition, those from a culturally and linguistically diverse or migrant background were nearly 40% more likely to be on an order. Indigenous status was not associated with community treatment order use in Australia and there were no New Zealand data. Community treatment orders did not reduce readmission rates or bed-days at 12-month follow-up. There was evidence of increased benefit in the longer-term but only after a minimum of 2 years of use. Finally, people on community treatment orders had a lower mortality rate, possibly related to increased community contacts. Conclusion: People from culturally and linguistically diverse or migrant backgrounds are more likely to be placed on a community treatment order. However, the evidence for effectiveness remains inconclusive and limited to orders of at least 2 years’ duration. The restrictive nature of community treatment orders may not be outweighed by the inconclusive evidence for beneficial outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document