Hospital Utilization Outcomes Following Assignment to Outpatient Commitment

Mortality-Risk With "Capacity" Constraints On Community Treatment Order Utilization

BACKGROUND

Assignment to a community treatment order (CTO) has been associated with reduced mortality risk. In Victoria Australia civil-rights enhancements involving capacity to refuse involuntary treatment have contributed to a 15% reduction between 2010 and 2019 in CTO assignments among first hospitalized patients with Schizophrenia diagnoses. Has this change impacted patient mortality risk?

STUDY DESIGN

This study considered mortality-risk between 2010 and 2019 for 3 patient groups with schizophrenia diagnoses: All 4848 hospitalized patients who were assigned to a CTO for the first time in the period; 3988 matched and randomly selected patients, who were first hospitalized in the decade, without CTO assignment; and 1675 never hospitalized or CTO-assigned outpatients. Deaths of Schizophrenic patients in each group were evaluated against expected deaths given standardized mortality ratios for Victoria. Logistic regression was used to evaluate mortality risk for each treatment group while taking account of race, demographics, differential access to initial diagnoses of life-threatening physical illness, mental health service resources, and indicators of social disadvantage.

STUDY RESULTS

A total of 78% of the 777 deaths of schizophrenia patients in all 3 groups were premature. The 2 hospitalized groups did not differ in mortality risk. Among Victoria's 2010-2019 outpatients (inclusive of treatment refusers with a recorded service contact), 16.2% had a Schizophrenia diagnosis-up from 0.2% in 2000-2009, the prior decade. Outpatients with Schizophrenia were at 48% greater risk of death than individuals in the hospitalized groups, taking all the afore mentioned risk factors into account.

CONCLUSIONS

Reductions in CTO utilization associated with potential treatment refusals of involuntary community-treatment supervision, seem to have increased mortality risk for this vulnerable population. The line between civil-rights protection and abandonment has been blurred.

Need for Treatment, A Less Restrictive Alternative to Hospitalization, and Treatment Provision: The Utility of Community Treatment Orders

Background

Provision of involuntary care is an abridgment of civil rights and a source of controversy. Its circumstances require continued monitoring. This study asks 4 questions: Whether, in an era, focused on allowing patients with capacity to refuse community-treatment-order (CTO)-assignments, CTO use decreased. And whether CTOs fulfilled 3 statute mandates: Were CTO-assigned patients in greater need of treatment than other psychiatric inpatients? Was CTO assignment a less-restrictive alternative to psychiatric hospitalization? and Did CTO assignment provide needed treatment at internationally recommended levels with consequences for patient outcomes?

Method

All 214 388 Victoria, Australia mental health admissions between 2000- 2017 were reviewed. Two cohort samples were drawn and followed through 2019-ie, all 7826 hospitalized patients who were first placed on CTOs from 2010 to 2017 and 13 896 hospitalized patients without CTO placement. Logistic Regression was used to specify determinants of CTO assignment from the psychiatric inpatient population. OLS Regression with propensity score control to evaluate study questions.

Results

In the 2010-2017 decade, initial CTO assignments decreased by 3.5%, and initial hospitalizations increased by 5.9% compared to the 2000-2009 period. At hospital admission and discharge, based on Health of the Nations Score ratings, the CTO-cohort's need for treatment exceeded that of non-CTO patients. CTO patients had 3.75 fewer days in average inpatient episode duration than other inpatients, when adjusted for CTO-assignment determinants, the ratio of patients to community case managers, and patient housing status. CTO patients needing rehospitalization spent 112.68 more days in the community than re-hospitalized non-CTO patients. Patient to case-manager ratios falling above recommended levels and the patient marginal housing status contributed to longer hospital stays and reduced community tenure.

Conclusions

Victoria relied less on CTOs as an LRA, consequently, experiencing increased initial hospitalizations. CTO patients were in greater need of treatment than non-CTO patients, yet, with required oversite had shorter hospitalizations and more time out of hospital prior to rehospitalization than the less severely ill non-CTO group. Patient LRA outcomes were adversely affected by higher than recommended community patient to case-manager ratios limiting needed treatment provision to hospital.

Accessing acute medical care to protect health: the utility of community treatment orders

Background

The conclusion that people with severe mental illness require involuntary care to protect their health (including threats due to physical-non-psychiatric-illness) is challenged by findings indicating that they often lack access to general healthcare and the assertion that they would access such care voluntarily if available and effective. Victoria, Australia's single-payer healthcare system provides accessible medical treatment; therefore, it is an excellent context in which to test these challenges.

Aims

This study replicates a previous investigation in considering whether, in Australia's easy-access single-payer healthcare system, patients placed on community treatment orders, specifically involuntary community treatment, are more likely to access acute medical care addressing potentially life-threatening physical illnesses than voluntary patients with and without severe mental illness.

Methods

Replicating methods used in 2000-2010, for the years 2010-2017, this study compared the acute medical care access of three new cohorts: 7826 hospitalised patients with severe mental illness who received a post-hospitalisation, community treatment order; 13 896 patients with severe mental illness released from the hospital without a community treatment order and 12 101 outpatients who were never psychiatrically hospitalised (individuals with less morbidity risk who were not considered to have severe mental illness) during periods when they were under versus outside community mental health supervision. Logistic regression was used to determine the influence of community-based community mental health supervision and the type of community mental health supervision (community treatment order vs non-community treatment order) on the likelihood of receiving an initial diagnosis of a life-threatening physical illness requiring acute care.

Results

Validating their shared elevated morbidity risk, 43.7% and 46.7%, respectively, of each hospitalised cohort (community treatment order and non-community treatment order patients) accessed an initial acute-care diagnosis for a life-threatening condition vs 26.3% of outpatients. Outside community mental health supervision, the likelihood that a community treatment order patient would receive a diagnosis of physical illness was 36% lower than non-community treatment order patients-1.30 times that of outpatients. Under community mental health supervision, their likelihood was two times greater than that of non-community treatment order patients and 6.6 times that of outpatients. Each community treatment order episode was associated with a 14.6% increase in the likelihood of a community treatment order patient receiving a diagnosis. The results replicate those found in an independent 2000-2010 cohort comparison.

Conclusions

Community mental health supervision, notably community treatment order supervision, in two independent investigations over two decades appeared to facilitate access to physical healthcare in acute care settings for patients with severe mental illness who were refusing treatment-a group that has been subject to excess morbidity and mortality.

Compulsory treatment order and rehospitalisation: A New Zealand study

OBJECTIVE

The effectiveness of compulsory treatment orders (CTO) in psychiatric practice is an area in need of evidence. There are no recent New Zealand publications on outcomes for patients under CTOs. This study examined the association between CTOs and subsequent rehospitalisation for patients with schizophrenia or related disorders.

METHOD

Two year outcome data for 326 consecutive patients discharged in 2013 and 2014 was obtained from the Programme for the Integration of Mental Health Data database. Regression analyses were performed with rehospitalisation as the main outcome.

RESULTS

For the 54% of patients discharged under CTOs, rehospitalisation was 2-4 times more likely for the CTO group than for voluntary patients. Patients under CTOs also spent longer in hospital post index admission (IA). However, patients placed under CTOs during IA stayed longer than those under CTOs prior to IA. Ethnicity did not contribute significantly to any of the findings.

CONCLUSION

This study did not show that patients under CTOs were associated with subsequent reduced resource use. The subgroup analysis suggested that studies with a longer follow-up period may provide better insight into the utility of CTOs.

Protecting Health and Safety with Needed-Treatment: the Effectiveness of Outpatient Commitment

Outpatient civil commitment (OCC) requires the provision of needed-treatment, as a less restrictive alternative (LRA) to psychiatric-hospitalization in order to protect against imminent-threats to health and safety associated with severe mental illness (SMI). OCC-reviews aggregating all studies report inconsistent outcomes and interpret such as intervention failure. This review, considering those studies whose outcome criteria are consistent with the provisions of OCC-law, seeks to determine OCC-effectiveness in meeting its legislated objectives. This review incorporated studies from previous systematic-reviews, used their search methodology, and added investigations through August 2020. Selected OCC-studies evaluated samples of all eligible patients in a jurisdiction. Their outcome-measures were threats to health or safety or the receipt of needed-treatment exclusive of post-OCC-assignment- hospitalization, the latter being the OCC-default for providing needed-treatment in the absence of an LRA and dependent on bed-availability. A study's evidence-quality was evaluated with the Berkeley Evidence Ranking and the New Castle Ottawa systems. Thirty-nine OCC-outcome-studies in six-outcome-areas directly addressed OCC-statute objectives: 21 considered imminent threats to health and safety, 10 compliance with providing needed-treatment, and 8 conformity to the LRA-standard. With the top evidence-rank equal to one, the studies M = 2.55. OCC-assignment was associated with reducing mortality-risk, increasing access to acute-medical-care, and reducing risks of violence and victimization. It enabled reaching these objectives as a LRA to hospitalization and facilitated the use of community-services by individuals refusing such assistance when outside of OCC-supervision. OCC's appears to enable recovery by reducing potentially life-altering health and safety risks associated with SMI.