Update on Assisted Outpatient Treatment

Rural Suicide: Demographics, Causes, and Treatment Implications

Suicide rates in rural areas are higher than urban areas and growing, with current treatment developments only exacerbating this discrepancy. Within individual factors, both age and gender relate to and intersect with personal values related to self-reliance and attitudes toward mental health difficulties and treatment to increase suicide risk. The lethality ubiquitous in rural environments and occupations is a leading factor in rural suicide rates, with other factors such as race alternately noted to be a key factor but with more mixed findings. The cultural values of rural communities as typically negative toward mental health disclosure and treatment contribute to the disengagement of rural communities from treatment that may otherwise prevent suicides, exacerbating the physical lack of treatment access many rural communities experience. Working within the primary care system alongside increased telehealth utilization are suggested to reduce rural suicide rates.

Client Outreach in Los Angeles County's Assisted Outpatient Treatment Program: Strategies and Barriers to Engagement

Purpose

Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) programs can compel treatment-refusing individuals to participate in mental health treatment via civil court order. In California's AOT programs, individuals first must be offered 30 days of outreach services and can accept services voluntarily. This study examines the use of outreach strategies in an AOT program with the potential for voluntary or involuntary enrollment.

Methods

Outreach staff completed a survey in which they reported and rated outreach strategies and barriers to treatment for 487 AOT-referred individuals.

Results

Outreach staff reported using a broad array of strategies to persuade and engage clients. Supportive and persuasive strategies were most common. More coercive strategies, including court order, were used when needed. More clients enrolled voluntarily (39.4%) than involuntarily (7.2%).

Conclusions

Outreach, coupled with the strategic used of potential court involvement, can lead to voluntary enrollment of treatment-refusing individuals with many, often severe, barriers to engaging in outpatient treatment.

Experiences with legally mandated treatment in patients with schizophrenia: A systematic review of qualitative studies

Background:

Patients with severe mental illness, including schizophrenia, may be legally mandated to undergo psychiatric treatment. Patients’ experiences in these situations are not well characterized. This systematic review of qualitative studies aims to describe the experiences of patients with schizophrenia and related disorders who have undergone legally mandated treatment.

Methods:

Four bibliographic databases were searched: CINAHL Plus (1981–2019), EMBASE (1947–2019), MEDLINE (1946–2019), and PsycINFO (1806–2019). These databases were searched for keywords, text words, and medical subject headings related to schizophrenia, legally mandated treatment and patient experience. The reference lists of included studies and systematic reviews were also investigated. The identified titles and abstracts were reviewed for study inclusion. A thematic analysis was completed for the synthesis of positive and negative aspects of legally mandated treatment.

Results:

A total of 4,008 citations were identified. Eighteen studies were included in the final synthesis. For the thematic analysis, results were collated under two broad themes; positive patient experiences and negative patient experiences. Patients were satisfied when their autonomy was respected, and dissatisfied when it was not. Patients often retrospectively recognized that their treatment was beneficial. Furthermore, negative aspects of the treatment included deficits in communication and a lack of information.

Conclusions:

Intervention research has historically focused on clinical outcomes and the quantitative aspects of treatment. Thus, this study provides insight into the qualitative aspects of patients’ experiences with legally mandated treatment. Recognizing these opinions and experiences can lead to better attitudes toward treatment for patients with schizophrenia and related psychiatric illnesses.

Decriminalizing mental illness: specialized policing responses

De-institutionalization of mental health patients has evolved, over nearly 3 generations now, to a status quo of mental health patients experiencing myriad contacts with first-responders, primarily police, in lieu of care. The current institutions in which these patients rotate through are psychiatric emergency units, emergency rooms, jails, and prisons. Although more police are now specially trained to respond to calls that involve mental health patients, the criminalization of persons with mental illness has been steadily increasing over the past several decades. There have also been deaths. The Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) model fosters mental health acumen among first responders, and facilitates collaboration among first responders, mental health professionals, and mental health patients and their families. Here, we review some modern, large city configurations of CIT, the co-responder model, the mitigating effects of critically situated community-based programs, as well as barriers to the success of joint efforts to better address this pressing problem.

Community Interventions to Promote Mental Health and Social Equity

(Reprinted with permission from Current Psychiatry Reports (2020) 21: 35).

Community Interventions to Promote Mental Health and Social Equity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review recent community interventions to promote mental health and social equity. We define community interventions as those that involve multi-sector partnerships, emphasize community members as integral to the intervention, and/or deliver services in community settings. We examine literature in seven topic areas: collaborative care, early psychosis, school-based interventions, homelessness, criminal justice, global mental health, and mental health promotion/prevention. We adapt the social-ecological model for health promotion and provide a framework for understanding the actions of community interventions.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are recent examples of effective interventions in each topic area. The majority of interventions focus on individual, family/interpersonal, and program/institutional social-ecological levels, with few intervening on whole communities or involving multiple non-healthcare sectors. Findings from many studies reinforce the interplay among mental health, interpersonal relationships, and social determinants of health. There is evidence for the effectiveness of community interventions for improving mental health and some social outcomes across social-ecological levels. Studies indicate the importance of ongoing resources and training to maintain long-term outcomes, explicit attention to ethics and processes to foster equitable partnerships, and policy reform to support sustainable healthcare-community collaborations.

The legal oversight of community treatment orders: A qualitative analysis of tribunal decision-making

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been in place in various jurisdictions for over three decades, and yet are still a controversial aspect of mental health provision. One of the ethical concerns CTOs may engender is how difficult it can be to secure discharge from them, which in some jurisdictions can result in service users being subject to compulsion in the community indefinitely. Given the questions that can therefore be raised about the discharge process, it is important to understand the role of the mental health tribunal as a key safeguard in the management of CTOs. However, whilst a substantial body of literature exists on CTOs and on various aspects of tribunal practice in inpatient settings respectively, relatively little has been written about the role of the tribunal in the oversight of CTO discharge decisions. This article presents the results of an eight month ethnographic investigation into CTO use in England, focusing on the factors which contribute to tribunal decisions. A total of 62 participants were involved in the study, including 18 service users on CTOs, 36 mental health practitioners and 8 tribunal chairs. A combination of interviews, observations and documentary analysis are drawn upon to illustrate tribunal decision-making practice on CTOs. The key themes reported on are: the mediating influence of participant presentation and interaction in tribunals; tribunal framing and interpretation of insight and risk; and the importance of timing to tribunals, both in terms of the perceived stability of a service user's social circumstances, and the length of the CTO. The findings highlight the cumulative and interrelated effect of such factors on tribunal decision-making, and point to how tribunal judgements are heavily weighted towards upholding CTOs, with the implications that holds for individual rights.