Assessing the New York City involuntary outpatient treatment program

Increased use of antipsychotic long-acting injections with community treatment orders

BACKGROUND

Community treatment orders (CTOs) are increasingly being used, despite a weak evidence base, and problems continue regarding Second Opinion Appointed Doctor (SOAD) certification of medication.

AIMS

The aim of the current study was to describe current CTO usage regarding patient characteristics, prescribed medication and CTO conditions.

METHOD

A 1-year prospective cohort study with consecutive sampling was conducted for all patients whose CTO was registered in a large mental health trust. Only the first CTO for each patient was included. Measures included sociodemographic variables, psychiatric diagnosis, CTO date of initiation and conditions, psychotropic medication and date of SOAD certification for medication. This study was conducted in the first year of CTO legislation in England and Wales.

RESULTS

A total of195 patients were sampled (mean age 40.6 years, 65% male, 52% black ethnic origin). There was significant geographical variability in rates of CTO use (χ(2) = 11.3, p = 0.012). A total of 53% had their place of residence specified as a condition and 29% were required to allow access into their homes. Of those with schizophrenia, 64% were prescribed an antipsychotic long-acting injection (LAI). Of the total group, 7% received high-dose antipsychotics, 10% were prescribed two antipsychotics and only 15% received SOAD certification in time.

CONCLUSIONS

There was geographical and ethnic variation in CTO use but higher rates of hospital detention in minority ethnic groups may be contributory. Most patients were prescribed antipsychotic LAIs and CTO conditions may not follow the least restrictive principle.

Community treatment orders and antipsychotic long-acting injections

BACKGROUND

The community treatment order (CTO) is the legal framework by which people in the community are compelled to accept treatment. Both antipsychotic long-acting injections (LAIs) and CTOs are used to address treatment non-adherence.

AIMS

To investigate the relationship between CTOs and LAI use in patients with schizophrenia.

METHOD

Prescribing, demographic and CTO data were collected for patients from four community mental health clinics in Melbourne, Australia, in 1998 and 2002.

RESULTS

Against a background of increasing use of oral second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) medication and decreasing use of LAIs, the rates of CTO implementation doubled from 13% to 26% of patients with schizophrenia between 1998 and 2002. Proportionally more patients with a CTO are prescribed LAIs rather than oral SGAs.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between receiving an LAI and being subject to a CTO is significant, and reflects the consideration given to enhancing adherence in a community mental health setting.

Compulsory community mental health treatment: literature review

Following their introduction in the United States in the 1970s various forms of compulsory treatment in the community have been introduced internationally. Compulsory treatment in the community involves a statutory framework that mandates enforceable treatment in a community setting. Such frameworks can be categorized as preventative, least restrictive, or as having both preventative and least restrictive features. Research falls into two categories; descriptive, naturalistic studies and controlled and uncontrolled comparative studies. The research has produced equivocal results, and presents numerous methodological challenges. Where programmes have demonstrated improved outcomes debate continues as to whether these outcomes are associated with legal compulsion or enhanced service provision. Service user, family and clinician perspectives demonstrate a divergence of views within and across groups, with clinicians more strongly in support than service users. The issue of compulsory community treatment is an important one for nurses, who are often at the forefront of clinical service provision, in some cases in statutory roles. Critical reflection on the issue of compulsory community treatment requires understanding of the limitations of empirical investigations and of the various ethical and social policy issues involved. There is a need for further research into compulsory community treatment and possible alternatives.

A qualitative analysis of the use of community treatment orders in Saskatchewan

This study examined the opinions of patients who have been placed on a community treatment order (CTO), their relatives, mental health clinicians and representatives of community agencies about the use of CTOs in Saskatchewan. Patients were assessed using indepth interviews, while their relatives, mental health professionals and representatives of community agencies took part in facilitated focus groups. Patients had contradictory feelings about CTOs. Most experienced some degree of coercion while on the orders but many believed that CTOs provided necessary structure in their lives. Clinicians were more consistently positive but recognized the difficult choices in balancing the subject's right to self-determination with the benefits of a treatment order. Family members viewed CTOs as necessary to control a chaotic situation caused by the subject's limited insight.

Is mandatory outpatient treatment effective?

This paper reviews the major studies of mandatory outpatient treatment (MOT) and examines why there has been inconsistency in some of the findings. Attempts to answer the question "is mandatory treatment effective?" must first clarify the type of mandatory treatment being examined, the type of patient being treated, and the outcome by which effectiveness is measured. There is consistent evidence that various forms of MOT increase follow-up with psychiatric services and that court-ordered outpatient committal decreases victimization of patients in the community. It also appears likely that MOT reduces the use of hospitalization; but, due to methodological problems associated with the research, this conclusion remains controversial.

Why are community treatment orders controversial?

The use of community treatment orders and other forms of mandatory outpatient treatment has been controversial. The debate on the appropriateness of compulsory treatment in the community addresses a volatile mix of clinical, social policy, legal, and philosophical issues. This paper describes the major sources of contention, outlines the position of the protagonists, and where possible, attempts to answer some of the questions raised and identify common ground.

Integrating knowledge generation with knowledge diffusion and utilization: a case study analysis of the Consortium for Applied Research and Evaluation in Mental Health

OBJECTIVE

Knowledge diffusion and utilization (KDU) have become a key focus in the health research community because of the limited success to date of research findings to inform health policies, programs and services. Yet, evidence indicates that successful KDU is often predicated on the early involvement of potential knowledge users in the conceptualization and conduct of the research and on the development of a "partnership culture". This study describes the integration of KDU theory with practice via a case study analysis of the Consortium for Applied Research and Evaluation in Mental Health (CAREMH).

METHODS

This qualitative study, using a single-case design, included a number of data sources: proposals, meeting minutes, presentations, publications, reports and curricula vitae of CAREMH members.

RESULTS

CAREMH has adopted the following operational strategies to increase KDU capacity: 1) viewing research as a means and not as an end; 2) bringing the university and researcher to the community; 3) using participatory research methods; 4) embracing transdisciplinary research and interactions; and 5) using connectors. Examples of the iterative process between researchers and potential knowledge users in their contribution to knowledge generation, diffusion and utilization are provided.

CONCLUSIONS

This case study supports the importance of early and ongoing involvement of relevant potential knowledge users in research to enhance its utilization potential. It also highlights the need for re-thinking research funding approaches.