1
|
Marcó-García S, Ariyo K, Owen GS, David AS. Decision making capacity for treatment in psychiatric inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Med 2024; 54:1074-1083. [PMID: 38433596 DOI: 10.1017/s0033291724000242] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/05/2024]
Abstract
Decision-making capacity (DMC) among psychiatric inpatients is a pivotal clinical concern. A review by Okai et al. (2007) suggested that most psychiatric inpatients have DMC for treatment, and its assessment is reliable. Nevertheless, the high heterogeneity and mixed results from other studies mean there is considerable uncertainty around this topic. This study aimed to update Okai's research by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis to address heterogeneity. We performed a systematic search across four databases, yielding 5351 results. We extracted data from 20 eligible studies on adult psychiatric inpatients, covering DMC assessments from 2006 to May 2022. A meta-analysis was conducted on 11 papers, and a quality assessment was performed. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022330074). The proportion of patients with DMC for treatment varied widely based on treatment setting, the specific decision and assessment methods. Reliable capacity assessment was feasible. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Global Assessment of Function (GAF), and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) predicted clinical judgments of capacity. Schizophrenia and bipolar mania were linked to the highest incapacity rates, while depression and anxiety symptoms were associated with better capacity and insight. Unemployment was the only sociodemographic factor correlated with incapacity. Assessing mental capacity is replicable, with most psychiatric inpatients able to make treatment decisions. However, this capacity varies with admission stage, formal status (involuntary or voluntary), and information provided. The severity of psychopathology is linked to mental capacity, though detailed psychopathological data are limited.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silvia Marcó-García
- Teaching, Research & Innovation Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Spain
- Etiopathogenesis and treatment of severe mental disorders (MERITT), Sant Joan de Déu Research Institute, Sant Joan de Déu Foundation, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Barcelona, 08035 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Kevin Ariyo
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Gareth S Owen
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Anthony S David
- Division of Psychiatry, UCL Institute of Mental Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hutton P, Kelly J, Taylor CDJ, Williams B, Emsley R, Alexander CH, Vikram A, Saddington D, McCann A, Burke J, Eliasson E, Harper S, Karatzias T, Taylor PJ, Watson A, Dougall N, Stavert J, O'Rourke S, Glasgow A, Murphy R, Palmer K, Zaidi N, Bidwell P, Pritchard J, Carr L, Woodrow A. Accelerating the development of a psychological intervention to restore treatment decision-making capacity in patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorder: a study protocol for a multi-site, assessor-blinded, pilot Umbrella trial (the DEC:IDES trial). Pilot Feasibility Stud 2023; 9:117. [PMID: 37422659 PMCID: PMC10329297 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-023-01323-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 05/26/2023] [Indexed: 07/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A high proportion of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders will at some point in their lives be assessed as not having the capacity to make their own decisions about pharmacological treatment or inpatient care ('capacity'). Few will be helped to regain it before these interventions proceed. This is partly because effective and safe methods to do so are lacking. Our aim is to accelerate their development by testing, for the first time in mental healthcare, the feasibility, acceptability and safety of running an 'Umbrella' trial. This involves running, concurrently and under one multi-site infrastructure, multiple assessor-blind randomised controlled trials, each of which is designed to examine the effect on capacity of improving a single psychological mechanism ('mechanism'). Our primary objectives are to demonstrate feasibility of (i) recruitment and (ii) data retention on the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Treatment (MacCAT-T; planned primary outcome for a future trial) at end-of-treatment. We selected three mechanisms to test: 'self-stigma', low self-esteem and the 'jumping to conclusions' bias. Each is highly prevalent in psychosis, responsive to psychological intervention, and hypothesised to contribute to impaired capacity. METHODS Sixty participants with schizophrenia-spectrum diagnoses, impaired capacity and one or more mechanism(s) will be recruited from outpatient and inpatient mental health services in three UK sites (Lothian, Scotland; Lancashire and Pennine; North West England). Those lacking capacity to consent to research could take part if the key criteria were met, including either proxy consent (Scotland) or favourable Consultee advice (England). They will be allocated to one of three randomised controlled trials, depending on which mechanism(s) they have. They will then be randomised to receive, over an 8-week period and in addition to treatment as usual (TAU), 6 sessions of either a psychological intervention which targets the mechanism, or 6 sessions of assessment of the causes of their incapacity (control condition). Participants are assessed at 0 (baseline), 8 (end-of-treatment) and 24 (follow-up) weeks post-randomisation using measures of capacity (MacCAT-T), mechanism, adverse events, psychotic symptoms, subjective recovery, quality of life, service use, anxiety, core schemata and depression. Two nested qualitative studies will be conducted; one to understand participant and clinician experiences and one to investigate the validity of MacCAT-T appreciation ratings. DISCUSSION This will be the first Umbrella trial in mental healthcare. It will produce the first 3 single-blind randomised controlled trials of psychological interventions to support treatment decision-making in schizophrenia-spectrum disorder. Demonstrating feasibility will have significant implications not only for those seeking to support capacity in psychosis, but also for those who wish to accelerate the development of psychological interventions for other conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04309435 . Pre-registered on 16 March 2020.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Hutton
- School of Health & Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.
- Edinburgh Research & Innovation Centre for Complex and Acute Mental Health Problems, Edinburgh, UK.
| | - James Kelly
- Faculty of Health & Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
- Lancashire & South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK
| | - Christopher D J Taylor
- Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, Ashton-Under-Lyne, UK
- Division of Psychology & Mental Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Brian Williams
- School of Health, Social Care & Life Sciences, University of the Highlands and Islands, Inverness, UK
| | - Richard Emsley
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, Kings College London, London, UK
| | | | - Anvita Vikram
- Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, Ashton-Under-Lyne, UK
| | | | - Andrea McCann
- Lancashire & South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK
| | - Joseph Burke
- School of Health & Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Emma Eliasson
- NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
- NHS Research Scotland Mental Health Network, Edinburgh, UK
- National Centre for Suicide Research and Prevention, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Sean Harper
- Edinburgh Research & Innovation Centre for Complex and Acute Mental Health Problems, Edinburgh, UK
- NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Thanos Karatzias
- School of Health & Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
- Edinburgh Research & Innovation Centre for Complex and Acute Mental Health Problems, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Peter J Taylor
- Division of Psychology & Mental Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Nadine Dougall
- School of Health & Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Jill Stavert
- School of Health & Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Suzanne O'Rourke
- School of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | | | | | - Karen Palmer
- Lancashire & South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK
| | - Nosheen Zaidi
- Lancashire & South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK
| | - Polly Bidwell
- Lancashire & South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK
| | | | - Lucy Carr
- Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, Ashton-Under-Lyne, UK
| | - Amanda Woodrow
- School of Health & Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
- Edinburgh Research & Innovation Centre for Complex and Acute Mental Health Problems, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Killey CM, Allott K, Whitson S, Francey SM, Bryant C, Simmons MB. Decisional capacity in young people with first episode psychosis, major depressive disorder and no mental disorder. Schizophr Res Cogn 2022; 28:100228. [PMID: 35242603 PMCID: PMC8861421 DOI: 10.1016/j.scog.2021.100228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2021] [Revised: 11/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
We aimed to (1) examine decisional capacity for treatment in young people (aged 15 to 25 years) with first-episode psychosis (FEP), Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and no mental disorder, and (2) determine which theoretically relevant factors are associated with, and predict decisional capacity. We assessed decisional capacity (using MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Treatment; MacCAT-T), cognitive abilities, insight and symptom severity in young people with no mental disorder (n = 38), MDD (n = 38) and FEP (n = 18) from inpatient and outpatient services. Most young people with MDD (84.2%) or no mental disorder (86.8%) had adequate decisional capacity to consent to treatment based on recommended cut-off scores, compared with fewer than half of the those with FEP (44.4%). Levels of capacity were not significantly different between young people with MDD and those with no mental disorder (p = .861). However, young people with FEP demonstrated significantly poorer decisional capacity than those with no mental disorder (p = .006) and MDD (p = .009). A hierarchical regression analysis suggested that differences may be better explained by variation in cognitive ability, especially thematic verbal recall. Greater symptom severity and poorer insight were associated with poorer decisional capacity for FEP (p = .008 and p < .001, respectively), but not MDD (p = .050 and p = .805, respectively). Cognitive performance (i.e., predicted IQ, processing speed, mental flexibility and thematic verbal memory) collectively explained 36.6% of the variance in decisional capacity (p < .001). Thematic verbal memory was the strongest predictor of decisional capacity (p < .001). Supports for memory should be implemented to facilitate involvement in treatment decisions during the early course of illness. We tested decisional capacity in young people with first episode psychosis, major depressive disorder and no mental disorder. Most with major depressive disorder or no mental disorder had adequate capacity, compared to fewer than half with first episode psychosis. In first episode psychosis, greater symptom severity and poorer insight were related to poorer decisional capacity. Cognitive performance significantly explained variance in decisional capacity. A subgroup of young people will need support to be involved in making decisions, even in early stages of illness.
Collapse
|
5
|
What Is the Capacity of Individuals with Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder to Make Healthcare Decisions? An Exploratory Study of the Views of Patients, Psychiatrists, and Family Caregivers—A Survey on Decisional Capacity in Mental Health. PSYCHIATRY INTERNATIONAL 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/psychiatryint2020010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Research on the decisional capacity of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients mostly reflects the hospital context. Aim: To describe the views of patients, psychiatrists, and caregivers on the capacity of individuals with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder to make everyday decisions on their care related to their illness. Methods: A survey was conducted among schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients, psychiatrists, and caregivers (June 2019 to January 2020; seven countries). A questionnaire was emailed to members of the Global Alliance of Mental Illness of Advocacy Network—Europe (GAMIAN; patients) and the European Federation of Families of People with Mental Illness (EUFAMI; caregivers) and to psychiatrists who voluntarily agreed to participate. Questions referred to patients’ involvement and capacity for healthcare decision making, and to barriers to and opportunities for autonomous decision making. Frequency, agreement, and importance were rated on Likert scales. Descriptive statistics were conducted. Results: 21 schizophrenia or bipolar disorder patients (52.3% female; mean age (years) ± SD: 50.71 ± 12.02), 11 psychiatrists (18.2% female), and 15 caregivers (86.6% female; 100% family related) participated in the survey. In total, 86% of patients felt frequently involved in decisions about everyday care and medications, and 91% of psychiatrists and 40% of caregivers perceived the same; 38% of patients felt frequently involved in decisions about the use of acute symptom medications, and 57% on care planning, and 55% and 82% of psychiatrists, and 40% and 53% of caregivers, respectively, believed the same; and 86% of patients, 91% of psychiatrists, and 47% of caregivers agreed on the capacity of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder patients to value the implications of taking medicines to prevent acute psychotic crises. Poor understanding and training are barriers, while advocacy and increasing interest in patients’ needs are opportunities for increasing autonomous decision making. Conclusions: Stakeholders concur that schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients have the capacity to make everyday decisions around their care related to their illness, including acute symptom management. Barriers and opportunities exist to foster autonomous decisions among mental illness individuals.
Collapse
|