Community treatment orders and care planning: How is engagement and decision-making enacted?

Community-based models of care facilitating the recovery of people living with persistent and complex mental health needs: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Objective

This study aims to assess the effectiveness of community-based models of care (MoCs) supporting the recovery of individuals who experience persistent and complex mental health needs.

Method

We conducted a systematic review and narrative synthesis of MoC studies reporting clinical, functional, or personal recovery from October 2016 to October 2021. Sources were Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. Studies were grouped according to MoC features. The narrative synthesis was led by our researchers with lived experience.

Results

Beneficial MoCs ranged from well-established to novel and updated models and those explicitly addressing recovery goals and incorporating peer support: goal-focused; integrated community treatment; intensive case management; partners in recovery care coordination; rehabilitation and recovery-focused; social and community connection-focused; supported accommodation; and vocational support. None of our diverse group of MoCs supporting recovery warranted a rating of best practice. Established MoCs, such as intensive case management, are promising practices regarding clinical and functional recovery, with potential for enhancements to support personal recovery. Emerging practice models that support personal and functional recovery are those where consumer goals and priorities are central.

Conclusion

Evidence for established models of care shows that there is a need for inevitable evolution and adaptation. Considering the high importance of effective MoCs for people experiencing persistent and complex mental health needs, further attention to service innovation and research is required. Greater emphasis on the inclusion of lived and living experience in the design, delivery, implementation, and research of MoCs is needed, to enhance MOCs' relevance for achieving individual consumer recovery outcomes.

Premature termination, satisfaction with care, and shared decision-making during home treatment compared to inpatient treatment: A quasi-experimental trial

BACKGROUND

Inpatient equivalent home treatment (IEHT), implemented in Germany since 2018, is a specific form of home treatment. Between 2021 and 2022, IEHT was compared to inpatient psychiatric treatment in a 12-months follow-up quasi-experimental study with two propensity score matched cohorts in 10 psychiatric centers in Germany. This article reports results on the treatment during the acute episode and focuses on involvement in decision-making, patient satisfaction, and drop-out rates.

METHODS

A total of 200 service users receiving IEHT were compared with 200 matched statistical "twins" in standard inpatient treatment. Premature termination of treatment as well as reasons for this was assessed using routine data and a questionnaire. In addition, we measured patient satisfaction with care with a specific scale. For the evaluation of patient involvement in treatment decisions, we used the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9).

RESULTS

Patients were comparable in both groups with regard to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Mean length-of-stay was 37 days for IEHT and 28 days for inpatient treatment. In both groups, a similar proportion of participants stopped treatment prematurely. At the end of the acute episode, patient involvement in decision-making (SDM-Q-9) as well as treatment satisfaction scores were significantly higher for IEHT patients compared to inpatients.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to inpatient care, IEHT treatment for acute psychiatric episodes was associated with higher treatment satisfaction and more involvement in clinical decisions.

NDIS Participants with Psychosocial Disabilities and Life-Limiting Diagnoses: A Scoping Review

This research aimed to map evidence about system supports and gaps for Australians with psychosocial disabilities and life-limiting diagnoses. A scoping review of available policy documents, academic, and grey literature was completed to discover key characteristics of this concept and provide context around the phenomenon. Our focus was on Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), a key reform providing support to the disability population nationally. No peer-reviewed or grey literature was retrieved on the phenomena. Therefore, three lines of enquiry were developed: experiences of NDIS participants living with psychosocial disabilities; the death, dying, and palliative care supports and experiences of NDIS participants of any disability type; and the experiences for people living with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) and life-limiting diagnoses. Five themes were identified: (1) the person; (2) advocacy; (3) informal supports; (4) formal supports; and (5) existing research. NDIS participants living with SPMI and their informal and formal support systems are still struggling to navigate the NDIS. While there are no specific publications about their end-of-life experiences, people with SPMI often experience poor end-of-life outcomes. Rigorous research into their death, dying, and palliative care experiences is needed to inform improved support to them, including their end-of-life care.

Use of compulsory community treatment in mental healthcare: An integrative review of stakeholders' opinions

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have examined the effects of compulsory community treatment (CCT), amongst them there were three randomized controlled trials (RCT). Overall, they do not find that CCT affects clinical outcomes or reduces the number or duration of hospital admissions more than voluntary care does. Despite these negative findings, in many countries CCT is still used. One of the reasons may be that stakeholders favor a mental health system including CCT.

AIM

This integrative review investigated the opinions of stakeholders (patients, significant others, mental health workers, and policy makers) about the use of CCT.

METHODS

We performed an integrative review; to include all qualitative and quantitative manuscripts on the views of patients, significant others, clinicians and policy makers regarding the use of CCT, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley), and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

We found 142 studies investigating the opinion of stakeholders (patients, significant others, and mental health workers) of which 55 were included. Of these 55 studies, 29 included opinions of patients, 14 included significant others, and 31 included mental health care workers. We found no studies that included policy makers. The majority in two of the three stakeholder groups (relatives and mental health workers) seemed to support a system that used CCT. Patients were more hesitant, but they generally preferred CCT over admission. All stakeholder groups expressed ambivalence. Their opinions did not differ clearly between those who did and did not have experience with CCT. Advantages mentioned most regarded accessibility of care and a way to remain in contact with patients, especially during times of crisis or deterioration. The most mentioned disadvantage by all stakeholder groups was that CCT restricted autonomy and was coercive. Other disadvantages mentioned were that CCT was stigmatizing and that it focused too much on medication.

CONCLUSION

Stakeholders had mixed opinions regarding CCT. While a majority seemed to support the use of CCT, they also had concerns, especially regarding the restrictions CCT imposed on patients' freedom and autonomy, stigmatization, and the focus on medication.