Mental Health Nurses Overcoming Adversity: A Discursive Review

The mental health nursing profession has experienced various challenges since its inception. This discursive review considers these challenges, including how mental health nurses have and can continue to overcome adversity as individuals and as a profession. The discussion examines the influence of the profession's historical involvement in institutionalization and coercive care; the continuing impact of stigma; and the increasing demand for mental health services, amidst chronic staff shortages. Collectively, mental health nurses must harness strong therapeutic relationships, intra- and multi-disciplinary collaboration, personal and professional resilience, education that prepares them for the future, and sector-wide planning and innovation, to respond positively to these challenges. These approaches will support mental health nurses to overcome adversity and achieve positive outcomes for the profession and people with the lived experience of mental illness.

Where the public health principles meet the individual: a framework for the ethics of compulsory outpatient treatment in psychiatry

Background

Compulsory treatments represent a legal means of imposing treatment on an individual, usually with a mental illness, who refuses therapeutic intervention and poses a risk of self-harm or harm to others. Compulsory outpatient treatment (COT) in psychiatry, also known as community treatment order, is a modality of involuntary treatment that broadens the therapeutic imposition beyond hospitalization and into the community. Despite its existence in over 75 jurisdictions worldwide, COT is currently one of the most controversial topics in psychiatry, and it presents significant ethical challenges. Nonetheless, the ethical debate regarding compulsory treatment almost always stops at a preclinical level, with the different ethical positions arguing for or against its use, and there is little guidance to support for the individual clinicians to act ethically when making the decision to implement COT.

Main body

The current body of evidence is not clear about the efficacy of COT. Therefore, despite its application in several countries, evidence favouring the use of COT is controversial and mixed at best. In these unclear circumstances, ethical guidance becomes paramount. This paper provides an ethical analysis of use of COT, considering the principlist framework established by Ross Upshur in 2002 to justify public health interventions during the 2002–2004 severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak. This paper thoroughly examines the pertinence of using the principles of harm, proportionality, reciprocity, and transparency when considering the initiation of COT.

Conclusion

Ross Upshur’s principlist model provides a useful reflection tool for justifying the application of COT. This framework may help to inform sounder ethical decisions in clinical psychiatric practice.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of predictors and outcomes of community treatment orders in Australia and New Zealand

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.

The association between discontinuation of community treatment orders and outcomes in the 12-months following discharge from residential mental health rehabilitation

To compare the post-discharge outcomes of people admitted to community-based residential mental health rehabilitation facilities subject to a Community Treatment Order (CTO) who do and do not have this order discontinued prior to discharge. People subject to a CTO who were admitted across five Community Care Units (CCUs) in Queensland, Australia between 2005 and 2014 (N = 311), were grouped based on involuntary treatment status at the time of their discharge. Individuals whose status changed to voluntary (n = 63; CTO > VOL) were compared with those whose treatment remained involuntary (n = 248; CTO-CTO) on demographic, clinical and treatment-related characteristics. Group-level and individualised changes were assessed between the year pre-admission and the year post-discharge. The primary outcome measure was change in mental health and social functioning (Health of the Nation Outcome Scale). Secondary outcomes included disability (Life Skills Profile-16), service use, accommodation instability, and involuntary treatment. Logistic regression was completed to examine predictors of CTO discontinuation during CCU care. Potential predictors covered service-, consumer-, and treatment-related characteristics. Compared to the CTO-CTO group, the CTO > VOL group had significantly longer episodes of CCU care, more frequent primary diagnoses of schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and were more likely to be female. Following discharge, CTO > VOL subjects had more frequent reliable and clinically significant improvement in HoNOS scores, as well as more frequently demonstrated reliable improvement in hospital bed use and accommodation instability than the CTO-CTO subjects. CTO discontinuation was predicted by longer duration of CCU care, being a female, and having a smaller number of psychiatry-related bed use prior admission. Our findings suggest that CCU care of sufficient duration may lessen the need for subsequent compulsory treatment in the community.

Efficacy of compulsory community treatment and use in minority ethnic populations: A statewide cohort study

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting and equivocal evidence for the efficacy of compulsory community treatment within Australia and overseas, but no study from Queensland. In addition, although people from Indigenous or culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are over-represented in compulsory admissions to hospital, little is known about whether this also applies to compulsory community treatment.

AIMS

We initially investigated whether people from Indigenous or culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds in terms of country of birth, or preferred language, were more likely to be on compulsory community treatment using statewide databases from Queensland. We then assessed the impact of compulsory community treatment on health service use over the following 12 months. Compulsory community treatment included both community treatment orders and forensic orders.

METHODS

Cases and controls from administrative health data were matched on age, sex, diagnosis and time of hospital discharge (the index date). Multivariate analyses were used to examine potential predictors of compulsory community treatment, as well as impact on bed-days, time to readmission or contacts with public mental health services in the subsequent year.

RESULTS

We identified 7432 cases and controls from January 2013 to February 2017 (total n = 14,864). Compulsory community treatment was more likely in Indigenous Queenslanders (adjusted odds ratio = 1.45; 95% confidence interval = [1.28, 1.65]) subjects coming from a culturally and linguistically diverse background (adjusted odds ratio = 1.54; 95% confidence interval = [1.37, 1.72]), or those who had a preferred language other than English (adjusted odds ratio = 1.66; 95% confidence interval = [1.30, 2.11]). While community contacts were significantly greater in patients on compulsory community treatment, there was no difference in bed-days while time to readmission was shorter. Restricting the analyses to just community treatment orders did not alter these results.

CONCLUSION

In common with other coercive treatments, Indigenous Australians and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are more likely to be placed on compulsory community treatment. The evidence for effectiveness remains inconclusive.

Rates of use of community treatment orders in Australia

OBJECTIVES

The variable and changing rates of use of involuntary community treatment orders (CTOs) in the treatment of people living with mental illness are not well-documented or well understood. This new study sought to determine contemporary rates of use in Australia, where local jurisdictions were previously shown to have varied and shifting rates of use that were high by world standards.

METHODS

Australian state and territory mental health review tribunals, health departments, and/or offices of the chief psychiatrist were surveyed for the most recent published annual data on the total number of individual people placed on a CTO and/or the total number of CTOs made.

FINDINGS

Contemporary rates of CTO use in Australia range from 40.0 per 100,000 population (in Western Australia) to 112.5 per 100,000 (in South Australia). Since the last national survey, the rates of people subject to CTOs fell into in two jurisdictions (Victoria and Western Australia). However, rates of CTOs made were higher than previous figures in all jurisdictions reporting data. Use of CTOs in Australia varies considerably within and between jurisdictions.

CONCLUSIONS

Australian jurisdictions continue to use CTOs at high and varying rates, despite unresolved questions about their role and impact. Transparency and accountability around their use would be improved by regular and nationally uniform public reporting of CTO data. Further research into how and why CTOs are used may also provide opportunities to respond to factors driving their use and thereby reduce the use of coercion in mental health care.

Community treatment orders increase community care and delay readmission while in force: Results from a large population-based study

OBJECTIVE

There is debate about the effectiveness of community treatment orders in the management of people with a severe mental illness. While some case-control studies suggest community treatment orders reduce hospital readmissions, three randomised controlled trials find no effects. These randomised controlled trials measure outcomes over a longer period than the community treatment order duration and assess the combined effectiveness of community treatment orders both during and after the intervention. This study examines the effectiveness of community treatment orders in a large population-based sample, restricting observation to the period under a community treatment order.

METHODS

All persons ( n = 5548) receiving a community treatment order in New South Wales, Australia, over the period 2004-2009 were identified. Controls were matched using a propensity score based on demographic, clinical and prior care variables. A baseline period equal to each case's duration of treatment was constructed. Treatment effects were compared using zero-inflated negative binomial regression, adjusting for demographics, clinical characteristics and pre-community treatment order care.

RESULTS

Compared to matched controls, people on community treatment orders were less likely to be readmitted (odds ratio = 0.90, 95% confidence interval = [0.84, 0.97]) and had a significantly longer time to their first readmission (incidence rate ratio = 1.47, 95% confidence interval = [1.36, 1.58]), fewer hospital admissions (incidence rate ratio = 0.90, 95% confidence interval = [0.84, 0.96]) and more days of community care (incidence rate ratio = 1.55, 95% confidence interval = [1.51, 1.59]). Increased community care and delayed first admission were found for all durations of community treatment order care. Reduced odds of readmission were limited to people with 6 months or less of community treatment order care, and reduced number of admissions and days in hospital to people with prolonged (>24 months) community treatment order care.

CONCLUSION

In this large population-based study, community treatment orders increase community care and delay rehospitalisation while they are in operation. Some negative findings in this field may reflect the use of observation periods longer than the period of active intervention.

Community Treatment Orders and Supported Decision-Making

This paper presents findings from an interdisciplinary project undertaken in Victoria, Australia, investigating the barriers and facilitators to supported decision-making (SDM) for people living with diagnoses including schizophrenia, psychosis, bipolar disorder, and severe depression; family members supporting them; and mental health practitioners, including psychiatrists. We considered how SDM can be used to align Australian laws and practice with international human rights obligations. The project examined the experiences, views, and preferences of consumers of mental health services, including people with experiences of being on Community Treatment Orders (CTOs), in relation to enabling SDM in mental health service delivery. It also examined the perspectives of informal family members or carers and mental health practitioners. Victoria currently has high rates of use of CTOs, and the emphasis on SDM in the Mental Health Act, 2014, is proposed as one method for reducing coercion within the mental health system and working towards more recovery-oriented practice. Our findings cautiously suggest that SDM may contribute to reducing the use of CTOs, encouraging less use of coercive practices, and improving the experience of people who are subject to these orders, through greater respect for their views and preferences. Nonetheless, the participants in our study expressed an often ambivalent stance towards CTOs. In particular, the emphasis on medication as the primary treatment option and the limited communication about distressing side effects, alongside lack of choice of medication, was a primary source of concern. Fears, particularly among staff, about the risk of harm to self and others, and stigma attached to complex mental health conditions experienced by consumers and their families, represent important overarching concerns in the implementation of CTOs. Supporting the decision-making of people on CTOs, respecting their views and preferences about treatment, and moving towards reducing the use of CTOs require system-wide transformation and a significant shift in values and practice across mental health service delivery.