Effectiveness of Forensic Assertive Community Treatment on Forensic and Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Given the increasing literature on forensic assertive community treatment (FACT), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the effectiveness of FACT among justice-involved individuals with severe mental illness. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Sixteen studies were included in the systematic review, six of which were included in the meta-analyses for a total of 1,246 participants. Mixed results regarding health-related outcomes were found. The pre-post FACT analysis and comparison with control groups did not yield significant results other than increased outpatient service use. Results on forensic outcomes were more compelling. Both the narrative review and the meta-analysis highlighted that FACT programs may improve justice outcomes such as the number of days spent in jail. More high quality and multisite randomized controlled trials are needed to consolidate findings. Further research is needed to examine other psychosocial factors related to FACT program success.

Substance Use Disorders as a Critical Element for Decision-Making in Forensic Assertive Community Treatment: A Systematic Review

Introduction: The prevalence of substance use disorders in forensic populations is high. They are an important factor linked to negative outcomes in mentally ill offenders and are detrimental to forensic or non-forensic outcome measures. In contrast, substance use disorders are often underdiagnosed and undertreated, especially in forensic settings. Forensic Assertive Community Treatment is a forensic adaptation of regular assertive community treatment, combined with essential elements of forensic rehabilitation theories. Little is known however on the effectivity of forensic assertive community treatment when it comes to substance use disorders or what their exact role is on the outcome measures. In this paper, we explore how SUD is treated in Forensic assertive community treatment and how it relates to the forensic and non-forensic outcome measures.Methods: We performed a systematic review (PRISMA) of forensic Assertive community treatment teams that followed the main evidence-based principles of regular assertive community treatment and added basic elements of forensic rehabilitation. We analyzed articles the Psychinfo and Medline databases dating from 2005 to 2020. Fifteen studies fit the search criteria and were included in the analysis. The Quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.Results: SUD was highly prevalent in all studies. Patients entered FACT through two pathways, either from a care continuum or directly from prison. The severity of SUD at intake emerges as a critical element when deciding which pathway to choose, as a high severity-score at the start of FACT follow-up was linked to recidivism. While differing in method all studies offered integrated SUD treatment. These included evidence-based techniques like CBT, therapeutic communities, and Substance Abuse Management Module. Though results on SUD outcomes were mixed 4 studies mentioned abstinence in 50–75%. The severity of SUD tended to increase initially and to stabilize afterwards.Conclusion: Severity of SUD at intake emerges as a decisive element in decision-making on entering FACT teams directly from prison or through a care-continuum. The ways to provide SUD treatment varied and outcomes for SUD were mixed. SUD was found to be detrimental to forensic and non-forensic outcome measures, such as recidivism or hospitalizations during FACT treatment.

The Greek Hybrid Version of the Assertive Community Treatment Model: A Perspective View between Challenges and Limitations

The Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) model of care has been long considered to be effective in the management of patients with severe mental illness (SMI) in most Western countries. The implementation of the original ACT model may be particularly challenging in rural and remote communities with small and dispersed populations and lack of adequate mental health services. Rural programs may have to adapt the model and modify the ACT fidelity standards to accommodate these limitations, and this is the rationale for the introduction of more flexible, hybrid ACT models. In rural Greece, the so called Mobile Mental Health Units (MMHUs) are well-established community mental health services. For patients with SMI that have difficulties engaging with treatment services, the new hybrid ACT model has been recently launched. The objective of this manuscript is to present the recently launched hybrid ACT model in rural areas in Greece and to explore the challenges and limitations in its implementation from the experience of a team of mental health professionals with ACT experience. Referral criteria have not been strictly set, but the number of previous relapses and hospitalizations is taken under consideration, as well as the history of poor treatment adherence and disengagement from mental health services. The main limitation in the implementation of the hybrid ACT service is that it has been introduced in several areas in the absence of a pre-existing community mental health service. This may impact referrals and limit focus on the difficult cases of patients with SMI, thus making the evaluation of the model inapplicable.

The foundations of the working alliance in assertive community treatment teams

Background In this study, we aimed to identify and define the fundamental components of the working alliance in multidisciplinary (Flexible) Assertive Community Treatment teams with shared caseloads, in order to support their daily practice and further research. Methods After reviewing the literature, concept mapping with professionals and clients was used to define the working alliance in (F) ACT teams. The resulting concept maps formed the basis for the working alliance assessment instrument, which was pilot tested with professionals and clients through cognitive interviews with a think-aloud procedure. Results The study led to the development of a twenty five-item assessment instrument to evaluate working alliances in multidisciplinary teams (WAM) that was comprised of three subscales: bond, task/goal and team. Two different versions were developed for clients and professionals. Conclusions The WAM instrument was developed to determine the quality of the working alliance in (F) ACT teams. Future research will focus on testing its psychometric properties and predictive value.

520 - Benefits of Assertive Community Treatment for Persons with Severe Mental Illness and Cancer

Breast cancer, the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women worldwide, is responsible for one in six cancer deaths (Sung, H. et al., 2021). Women with schizophrenia have an associated increased incidence of breast cancer compared to the general population (Grassi & Riba, 2020). Patients with severe mental illness are noted to have disparities in accessing and initiating cancer treatment especially among those who are older (Iglay et al., 2017). A case vignette will be presented to illustrate the care and interventions provided by an American Assertive Community Treatment team which fostered supportive treatment engagement and improved the quality of life for a patient that chose to forgo recommended cancer treatment. This presentation will highlight the essential nature of the Assertive Community Treatment team in supporting decisional capacity, facilitation of a patient’s grief and acknowledgement of one’s own mortality as well as incorporation of medical and palliative care. The attendee will appreciate the importance of the multidisciplinary approach for persons with chronic mental illness and co-morbid cancer diagnoses.

Dutch Forensic Flexible Assertive Community Treatment: Operating on the Interface Between General Mental Health Care and Forensic Psychiatric Care

In the Netherlands, Forensic Flexible Assertive Community Treatment (ForFACT) is used as a specialized form of outpatient intensive treatment. This outreaching type of treatment is aimed at patients with severe and long lasting psychiatric problems that are at risk of engaging in criminal behavior. In addition, these patients often suffer from addiction and experience problems in different areas of their life (e.g., financial debt, unemployment, or lack of daytime activities). The aim of this exploratory study was to gain more insight into the characteristics of the ForFACT patient population. More knowledge about these patients may enhance the effectiveness of ForFACT and therefore (further) reduce the risk of recidivism. Data on 132 ForFACT patients were gathered by studying electronic patient records, criminal records, and by conducting semi-structured interviews with practitioners and patients. Additionally, as part of a cognitive screening, two screening instruments were conducted to gain insight into intelligence and possible mild cognitive impairments. This article gives a broad description of the ForFACT patient population, including demographic data and context variables, diagnostics, recidivism risk and offense history, and aspects related to care. Furthermore, several recommendations are given to further improve ForFACT. Based on the results it can be concluded that the ForFACT patient population shows a high degree of diversity in complex care needs and responsivity issues. Therefore, this article highlights the necessity for ForFACT to collaborate with other mental health institutions, as well as probation officers, and forensic or criminal justice institutions. Moreover, it is important to continually check the inclusion and exclusion criteria when admitting patients to ForFACT, and to examine whether ForFACT is still the most adequate care for patients or if they need to be referred. In addition, the results emphasize the importance of cognitive screening for forensic outpatients. Finally, this study zooms in on the interface between forensic psychiatric care and general mental health care.

Service User Experiences of How Flexible Assertive Community Treatment May Support or Inhibit Citizenship: A Qualitative Study

The aim of this study was to explore and describe service user experiences of how receiving services from a Flexible Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) team may support or inhibit citizenship. Within a participatory design, individual interviews with 32 service users from five Norwegian FACT teams were analyzed using thematic, cross-sectional analysis. The findings showed that FACT may support citizenship by relating to service users as whole people, facilitating empowerment and involvement, and providing practical and accessible help. Experiences of coercion, limited involvement and authoritarian aspects of the system surrounding FACT had inhibited citizenship for participants in this study.