Opening pandora's box: the practical and legal dangers of involuntary outpatient commitment

Finding Common Ground for Diverging Policies for Persons with Severe Mental Illness

Two diametrically opposed positions predominate discourse for the care and treatment of persons with severe mental illness: anti-deinstitutionalization and anti-institutionalization. Both share the same goal of ensuring best quality of life for those with severe psychiatric disorders, but pathways to achieving this goal are very different and have resulted in much contention. Supporters of each position espouse a different belief system regarding people with psychiatric disorders and their presumed capabilities, placing varying emphasis on maximizing protection of the community versus protection of individual rights, and result in contrasting mental health policies and practice orientations. The authors delineate the history from which these positions evolved, consequent views, and policies and practices that emerged from these differing attitudes. The article culminates in a proposed practice approach that offers a more balanced approach to serving adults with mental illness -navigating risk management by preserving freedom and opportunities of risk while affording mutually satisfactory "risk control."

Community Treatment Orders and Other Forms of Mandatory Outpatient Treatment

This position paper has been substantially revised by the Canadian Psychiatric Association's Professional Standards and Practice Committee and approved for republication by the CPA's Board of Directors on July 26, 2018. The original position paper¹ was first approved by the Board of Directors on January 25, 2003. It was subsequently reviewed and approved for republication with minor revisions on June 2, 2009.

Compulsory community treatment to reduce readmission to hospital and increase engagement with community care in people with mental illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Compulsory community treatment (CCT) aims to reduce hospital readmissions among people with mental illness. However, research examining the usefulness of CCT is inconclusive. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of CCT in reducing readmission and length of stay in hospital and increasing community service use and treatment adherence.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched three databases (PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Embase) for quantitative studies on CCT published in English between Jan 1, 1806, and Jan 4, 2018. We included both randomised and non-randomised designs that compared CCT with no CCT, and pre-post designs that compared patients before and after CCT. Studies were eligible if they had been peer-reviewed, if 50% or more of patients had severe mental illness, and if CCT was the intervention. Trials in which CCT was used in response to a criminal offence were excluded. We extracted data on study characteristics and length of follow-up, patient-level data on diagnosis, age, sex, race, and admission history, and outcomes of interest (readmission to hospital, inpatient bed-days, community service use, and treatment adherence) for meta-analysis, for which we extracted summary estimates. We used a random-effects model to compare disparate outcome measures and convert effect size statistics into standardised mean differences. This systematic review is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018086232.

FINDINGS

Of 1931 studies identified, 41 (2%) met inclusion criteria and had sufficient data for analysis. Before and after CCT comparisons showed significant large effects on readmission to hospital (standardised mean difference 0·80, 95% CI 0·53-1·08; I²=94·74), use of community services (0·83, 0·46-1·21; I²=87·26), and treatment adherence (2·12, 1·69-2·55; I²=0), and a medium effect on inpatient bed-days (0·66, 0·46-0·85; I²=94·12). Contemporaneous controlled comparison studies (randomised and non-randomised) showed no significant effect on readmission, inpatient bed-days, or treatment adherence, but a moderate effect on use of community services (0·38, 0·19-0·58; I²=96·92). A high degree of variability in study quality was found, with observational study ratings ranging from three to nine. Bias most frequently centred on poor comparability between CCT and control participants.

INTERPRETATION

We found no consistent evidence that CCT reduces readmission or length of inpatient stay, although it might have some benefit in enforcing use of outpatient treatment or increasing service provision, or both. Future research should focus on why some people do not engage with treatment offered and on enhancing quality of the community care available. Shortcomings of this study include high levels of variability between studies and variation in study quality.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research.

Correlates of offense recidivism in patients with schizophrenia

INTRODUCTION

Schizophrenia increases the risk of offending. Recidivism rates are significant. Literature doesn't provide recidivism risk factors specific to patients with schizophrenia independently of the offenses' types.

OBJECTIVE

Identifying recidivism risk factors in schizophrenia patients independently of the offenses' types.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study. All included patients were admitted, at least once, to the forensic psychiatry unit in Razi Hospital between January 1st, 1985 and December 31st, 2014 after a decision of irresponsibility by reason of insanity. All those who reoffended during this period were considered as cases. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify recidivism risk factors.

RESULTS

We included 25 cases and 38 controls. Eight recidivism risk factors were identified. Living in poor urban neighborhoods (P = 0.023; OR = 4.86), having been unemployed (P = 0.042; OR = 2.18) and not having lived with the family (P = 0.039; OR = 1.36) after discharge were considered as risk factors. The same applied to alcohol (P = 0.026; OR = 4.89) and cannabis use disorders (P = 0.018; OR = 6.01). A hospitalization shorter than 6 months multiplied the risk by 1.79 (P = 0.046). A combination of conventional antipsychotics (P = 0.023; OR = 4.81) and a poor adherence to treatment (P = 0.001; OR = 10.42) were considered as recidivism risk factors too.

CONCLUSIONS

All eight recidivism risk factors are dynamic. This makes recidivism prevention conceivable. Measures involving the patient, the health care system, patients' families, society and the government should be undertaken.

Effects of assisted outpatient treatment and health care services on psychotic symptoms

RATIONALE

An ongoing debate concerns acceptability, benefits, and shortcomings of coercive treatment such as assisted outpatient treatment (AOT). The hypothesis that involuntary commitment to outpatient treatment may lead to a better clinical outcome for a subgroup of persons with severe mental illness (SMI) is controversial. Nonetheless, positive effects of AOT may be mediated by an increased availability of healthcare resources or increased service use.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the course of delusions, hallucinations, and negative symptoms among patients with SMI receiving AOT compared to patients receiving non-compulsory treatment (NCT). Moreover, we assessed if the effects of AOT on psychotic symptoms were mediated by increased healthcare service use.

METHODS

This study used a quasi-experimental design to examine the effect of AOT and the use of healthcare services on psychotic symptoms. In total, 76 (41.3%) participants with SMI received AOT, and 108 (58.7%) received NCT. The participants were interviewed at baseline every 3 months up to 1 year. Propensity score matching was used to control for group differences.

RESULTS

In the basic model, AOT was associated with lower severity of psychotic symptoms over all follow-up points. In the model including healthcare service use, the frequency of case manager visits predicted a reduction in severity of all psychotic symptoms. The frequency of visits to the outpatient clinics, frequency of emergency room, and psychiatrist visits were independently associated with lower levels of delusional symptoms. Psychiatrist visits were related to a decrease in negative symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Results indicate that the treatment benefits of AOT are enhanced with the increased use of mental healthcare services, suggesting that the positive effect of AOT on psychotic symptoms is related to the availability of mental healthcare service use. Coercive outpatient treatment might be more effective through greater use of intensive services.

Coercion in mental health: a trial of the effectiveness of community treatment orders and an investigation of informal coercion in community mental health care

Background

Coercion comprisesformal coercionorcompulsion[treatment under a section of the Mental Health Act (MHA)] andinformal coercion(a range of treatment pressures, includingleverage). Community compulsion was introduced in England and Wales as community treatment orders (CTOs) in 2008, despite equivocal evidence of effectiveness. Little is known about the nature and operation of informal coercion.

Design

The programme comprised three studies, with associated substudies: Oxford Community Treatment Order Evaluation Trial (OCTET) – a study of CTOs comprising a randomised controlled trial comparing treatment on CTO to voluntary treatment via Section 17 Leave (leave of absence during treatment under section of the MHA), with 12-month follow-up, an economic evaluation, a qualitative study, an ethical analysis, the development of a new measure of capabilities and a detailed legal analysis of the trial design; OCTET Follow-up Study – a follow-up at 36 months; and Use of Leverage Tools to Improve Adherence in community Mental Health care (ULTIMA) – a study of informal coercion comprising a quantitative cross-sectional study of leverage, a qualitative study of patient and professional perceptions, and an ethical analysis.

Participants

Participants in the OCTET Study were 336 patients with psychosis diagnoses, currently admitted involuntarily and considered for ongoing community treatment under supervision. Participants in the ULTIMA Study were 417 patients from Assertive Outreach Teams, Community Mental Health Teams and substance misuse services.

Outcomes

The OCTET Trial primary outcome was psychiatric readmission. Other outcomes included measures of hospitalisation, a range of clinical and social measures, and a newly developed measure of capabilities – the Oxford Capabilities Questionnaire – Mental Health. For the follow-up study, the primary outcome was the level of disengagement during the 36 months.

Results

Community treatment order use did not reduce the rate of readmission [(59 (36%) of 166 patients in the CTO group vs. 60 (36%) of 167 patients in the non-CTO group; adjusted relative risk 1.0 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.33)] or any other outcome. There were no differences for any subgroups. There was no evidence that it might be cost-effective. Qualitative work suggested that CTOs’ (perceived) focus on medication adherence may influence how they are experienced. No general ethical justification was found for the use of a CTO regime. At 36-month follow-up, only 19 patients (6% of 329 patients) were no longer in regular contact with services. Longer duration of compulsion was associated with longer time to disengagement (p = 0.023) and fewer periods of discontinuity (p < 0.001). There was no difference in readmission outcomes over 36 months. Patients with longer CTO duration spent fewer nights in hospital. One-third (35%) of the ULTIMA sample reported lifetime experiences of leverage, lower than in the USA (51%), but patterns of leverage experience were similar. Reporting leverage made little difference to patients’ perceived coercion. Patients’ experiences of pressure were wide-ranging and pervasive, and perceived to come from family, friends and themselves, as well as professionals. Professionals were committed to patient-centred approaches, but felt obliged to assert authority when patients relapsed. We propose a five-step framework for determining the ethical status of offers by mental health professionals and give detailed guidance for professionals about how to exercise leverage.

Conclusions

Community Treatment Orders do not deliver clinical or social functioning benefits for patients. In the absence of further trials, moves should be made to restrict or stop their use. Informal coercion is widespread and takes different forms.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73110773.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Community treatment orders: exploring the paradox of personalisation under compulsion

The introduction of supervised community treatment, delivered through community treatment orders (CTOs) in England and Wales, contrasts with the policy of personalisation, which aims to provide service users autonomy and choice over services. This article draws upon findings from a primarily qualitative study which included 72 semi-structured interviews (conducted between January and December 2012) with practitioners, service users and nearest relatives situated within a particular NHS Trust. The article also refers to a follow-on study in which 30 Approved Mental Health Practitioners were interviewed. The studies aimed to develop a better understanding of how compulsory powers are being used in the community, within a policy context that emphasises personalisation and person-centred care in service delivery. Findings from the interview data (which were analysed thematically) suggest that service users were often inadequately informed about the CTO and their legal rights. Furthermore, they tended to be offered little, or no, opportunity to make choices and have involvement in the making of the CTO and setting of conditions. Retrospectively, however, restrictions were often felt beneficial to recovery, and service users reported greater involvement in decisions at review stage. Areas of good practice are identified through which person-centred care can be better incorporated into the making of CTOs.

Involuntary admission and treatment of patients with mental disorder

Despite the efforts of the World Health Organization to internationally standardize strategies for mental-health care delivery, the rules and regulations for involuntary admission and treatment of patients with mental disorder still differ markedly across countries. This review was undertaken to describe the regulations and mental-health laws from diverse countries and districts of Europe (UK, Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, and Norway), the Americas (Canada, USA, and Brazil), Australasia (Australia and New Zealand), and Asia (Japan and China). We outline the criteria and procedures for involuntary admission to psychiatric hospitals and to community services, illustrate the key features of laws related to these issues, and discuss their implications for contemporary psychiatric practice. This review may help to standardize the introduction of legislation that allows involuntary admission and treatment of patients with mental disorders in the mainland of China, and contribute to improved mental-health care. In this review, involuntary admission or treatment does not include the placement of mentally-ill offenders, or any other aspect of forensic psychiatry.

Patient experiences of autonomy and coercion while receiving legal leverage in forensic assertive community treatment

Legal leverage is broadly defined as the use of legal authority to promote treatment adherence. It is widely utilized within mental health courts, drug courts, mandated outpatient treatment programs, and other intervention strategies for individuals with mental illness or chemical dependency who have contact with the criminal justice system. Nonetheless, the ethics of using legal authority to promote treatment adherence remains a hotly debated issue within public and professional circles alike. While critics characterize legal leverage as a coercive form of social control that undermines personal autonomy, advocates contend that it supports autonomy because treatment strategies using legal leverage are designed to promote health and independence. Despite the controversy, there is little evidence regarding the impact of legal leverage on patient autonomy as experienced and expressed by patients themselves. This report presents findings from a qualitative study involving six focus groups with severely mentally ill outpatients who received legal leverage through three forensic assertive community treatment (FACT) programs in Northeastern, Midwestern, and West Coast cities. Findings are discussed in the context of the self-determination theory of human motivation, and practical implications for the use of legal leverage are considered.

What would Mary Douglas do? A commentary on Kahan et al., "Cultural cognition and public policy: the case of outpatient commitment laws"

Involuntary outpatient commitment is a highly controversial issue in mental health law. Strong supporters of outpatient commitment see it as a form of access to community-based mental health care and a less restrictive alternative to hospitalization for people with severe mental illness; vocal opponents see it as an instrument of social control and an unwarranted deprivation of individual liberty. Kahan and colleagues apply the theory of "cultural cognition" in an empirical study of how cultural worldviews influence support for outpatient commitment laws among the general public and shape perceptions of evidence for these laws' effectiveness. This article critiques Kahan et al. and offers an alternative perspective on the controversy, emphasizing particular social facts underlying stakeholders' positions on outpatient commitment laws.

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.

Patient inducement, provider priorities, and resource allocation in public mental health systems

Public mental health systems are increasingly facing demands from the criminal justice system and social services agencies to provide services and support in cases in which mental illness contributes to crime, homelessness, or poverty. In this article we analyze how policies from outside public mental health systems affect resource allocation within these systems, using examples from criminal justice. These policies use two types of mechanisms: inducing patients to consume treatment (by offering rewards or imposing penalties) and inducing clinicians to provide treatment (by creating priorities). We propose a classification of these social policies based on whether they affect demand through rewards or penalties or supply through priorities. We then relate the classification to data on patients treated in public systems to evaluate the current prevalence and potential for growth in these outside demands. These inducements impose a set of nonobvious costs on other patients who are not targeted by the policies. Furthermore, they create incentives for both patients and providers to modify their behavior in order to take advantage of rewards, avoid penalties, or better compete for resources with prioritized patients. We consider some policy implications for avoiding unintended consequences of these policies.

The utility of extended outpatient civil commitment

OBJECTIVE

This study considers three hypotheses regarding the impact of extended involuntary outpatient commitment orders on services utilization.

METHOD

Service utilization of Victorian Psychiatric Case Register (VPCR) patients with extended (> or =180 day) outpatient commitment orders was compared to that of a diagnostically-matched treatment compliant group with similarly extended (> or =180 day) periods of outpatient care (N=1182)--the former receiving care during their extended episode on an involuntary basis while the latter participated in care voluntarily. Pre/post first extended episode mental health service utilization was compared via paired t tests with individuals as their own controls. Logistic and OLS regression as well as repeated measures ANOVA via the GLM SPSS program and post hoc t tests were used to evaluate between group and across time differences.

RESULTS

Extended episodes of care for both groups were associated with subsequent reduced use of hospitalization and increases in community treatment days. Extended orders did not promote voluntary participation in the period following their termination. Community treatment days during the extended episode for those on orders were raised to the level experienced by the treatment compliant comparison group during their extended episode and maintained at that level via subsequent renewal of orders throughout the patients' careers. Approximately six community treatment days were required for those on orders to achieve a one-day reduction in hospital utilization following the extended episode.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient commitment for those on extended orders in the Victorian context enabled a level of community-based treatment provision unexpected in the absence of this delivery system and provided an alternative to hospitalization.

PLC or TLC: is outpatient commitment the/an answer?

The lively debate over mandated community treatment in general and outpatient commitment laws (OPC) in particular has raised many issues. At its core, the debate is over how and to what extent laws should be formulated to persuade, leverage or coerce (PLC) persons with severe mental illness living in the community to comply with medications that mental health professionals believe they need. The alternative to PLC is what we call TLC (tender loving care): a strategy of using benefits - improved patient-centered treatment, entitlements and service delivery, including assertive outreach - rather than penalties or conditions on access to services, to induce compliance. We examine three aspects of the debate: (1) the empirical case for the need for OPC court orders to maintain revolving-door severely mentally ill persons in the community; (2) the normative argument over whether such orders constitute coercion, and, if so, whether that coercion is justifiable; and (3) the incentives such orders create to leverage community providers to augment resources and tailor treatment and services to entice patients to become willing participants in the management of their disorders.

Factors in the selection of patients for conditional release from their first psychiatric hospitalization

OBJECTIVE

This study examined a sample of patients in Victoria, Australia, to identify factors in selection for conditional release from an initial hospitalization that occurred within 30 days of entry into the mental health system.

METHODS

Data were from the Victorian Psychiatric Case Register. All patients first hospitalized and conditionally released between 1990 and 2000 were identified (N=8,879), and three comparison groups were created. Two groups were hospitalized within 30 days of entering the system: those who were given conditional release and those who were not. A third group was conditionally released from a hospitalization that occurred after or extended beyond 30 days after system entry. Logistic regression identified characteristics that distinguished the first group. Ordinary least-squares regression was used to evaluate the contribution of conditional release early in treatment to reducing inpatient episodes, inpatient days, days per episode, and inpatient days per 30 days in the system.

RESULTS

Conditional release early in treatment was used for 11 percent of the sample, or more than a third of those who were eligible for this intervention. Factors significantly associated with selection for early conditional release were those related to a better prognosis (initial hospitalization at a later age and having greater than an 11th grade education), a lower likelihood of a diagnosis of dementia or schizophrenia, involuntary status at first inpatient admission, and greater community involvement (being employed and being married). When the analyses controlled for these factors, use of conditional release early in treatment was significantly associated with a reduction in use of subsequent inpatient care.

Family perspective on community treatment orders: a New Zealand study

BACKGROUND

People with serious mental disorders typically live with family members. Despite increasing interest in compulsory community treatment for such patients, the experience and views of their family members have been little studied.

MATERIAL

Qualitative interviews with 27 family members, whose relatives have been subject to compulsory community treatment.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Family members are generally in favour of the use of compulsory community treatment orders. They perceive a positive influence on their relative, on themselves, on family relationships, and on relations with the clinical team. Family members are aware of the ethical and other dilemmas that attend the use of compulsory community care.

Effectiveness of community treatment orders for treatment of schizophrenia with oral or depot antipsychotic medication: clinical outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the effectiveness of community treatment orders (CTOs) used in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. The hypotheses were that CTOs enhance outcome for patients whose mental health would otherwise be compromised by poor adherence with treatment and that CTOs would enable this when either oral or depot antipsychotic medication was prescribed.

METHOD

This was a naturalistic study using a retrospective mirror-image design. The sample consisted of patients with schizophrenia (n = 94) who were treated on a CTO between November 1996 and October 1999. Two subgroups were defined: patients treated with oral antipsychotic medication (n = 31), and patients treated with depot medication (n = 63). Data were gathered via file review using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

For the whole sample and both subgroups the findings included significant increased number of service contacts, decreased number of admissions and decreased length of inpatient stay. For the total sample numbers of crisis team referrals and other episodes of relapse were significantly decreased. For the subgroup on depot medication there was a non-significant trend towards fewer crisis team referrals and a significant decrease in other episodes of relapse. There were no significant differences for the oral subgroup in crisis team referrals or other episodes of relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides further evidence that CTOs may be effective in improving the outcome for selected persons with schizophrenia and some evidence that they may enhance the outcome for selected patients with schizophrenia on oral antipsychotic medication.

Does involuntary outpatient commitment lead to more intensive treatment?

Studies of involuntary outpatient commitment (OPC) among persons with severe mental illness have concluded that OPC is only effective in improving treatment outcomes when it is sustained for 6 months or longer and is combined with frequent outpatient services. This article explores factors that influence the delivery of outpatient services to subjects in a randomized trial of OPC and finds 2 general patterns. Outpatient visits were more frequent among all subjects with apparent clinical need, regardless of study assignment, and among subjects whose OPC was sustained beyond an initial court order. These results suggest that, in practice, sustained OPC represents a consensual agreement between clinicians and the court to more intensively address the complex needs of persons with severe and persistent mental illness.

Outpatient commitment: the state of empirical research on its outcomes

This article briefly describes the historical conditions in the origin and development of outpatient commitment that framed the discourse on its merits and the empirical studies on its outcomes. It divides those empirical studies into two sets on the basis of the questions addressed and critically reviews them. The review pays particular attention to the latest studies that were able to randomize subjects to experimental and control conditions and that were able to offer enhanced services. Finally, this article presents issues not addressed by the empirical studies on outpatient commitment but that need to be addressed in order to understand the choice of using the law to force persons with mental illness to comply with treatment and receive services in the community.

The evolution of outpatient commitment in the USA: from conundrum to quagmire

Outpatient commitment (OPC), a major form of involuntary community-based treatment, has evolved in the United States on a state-by-state basis amidst a storm of controversy. The polarizing debate that has gone on intensely about OPC for the last two decades has all too often been devoid of data. This article reviews the various arguments pro and con about OPC, and then examines the research on the effectiveness of OPC. Since the newest data seem to support OPC as a useful tool in dealing with specific subpopulations of persons with chronic mental illness, the paper examines the question of whether OPC is a legitimate use of government power. The most extensive analysis of this question to date has occurred in the New York State Courts which have supported the New York State OPC statute, Kendra's Law. The paper concludes with an examination of the future of OPC in the states, calling in particular for further research into the question of determining to whom, from a clinical point of view, should OPC be delivered.

Extended outpatient civil commitment and treatment utilization

OBJECTIVE

This study considers four hypotheses regarding the impact of extended involuntary outpatient commitment orders on services utilization.

METHOD

All Victorian Psychiatric Case Register (VPCR) patients who had extended (180+ day) outpatient commitment orders in the nine year study period and a matched treatment compliant comparison group with extended periods of outpatient care (N = 1182), both with at least two years of post-episode experience, were evaluated. Pre/post episode utilization was compared via paired t tests with individuals as their own controls. Logistic and OLS regression as well as repeated measures ANOVA via the GLM SPSS program and post hoc t tests were used to evaluate between group and across time differences.

RESULTS

Extended episodes of care for both groups were associated with reduced use of hospitalization and increases in outpatient services. Extended orders did not promote voluntary participation in the post-period. Outpatient services during the extended episode for those on orders were raised to the level experienced by the treatment compliant comparison group and maintained at that level via subsequent renewal of orders throughout the patients' careers. OLS regression results indicate that approximately six community care service days were required for those on orders to achieve a one-day reduction in hospital utilization following the extended episode.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient commitment for those on extended orders in the Victorian context enables a level of community-based services provision, unexpected in the absence of this delivery system, which provides an alternative to hospitalization.

Community forensic psychiatry: restoring some sanity to forensic psychiatric rehabilitation

OBJECTIVE

To review clinical and legal paradigms of community forensic mental health care, with specific focus on New Zealand, and to develop a clinically based set of guiding principles for service development in this area.

METHOD

The general principles of rehabilitating mentally disordered offenders, and assertive community care programmes were reviewed and applied to the law and policy in a New Zealand forensic mental health setting.

RESULTS

There is a need to develop comprehensive community treatment programmes for mentally disordered offenders. The limited available research supports assertive community treatment models, with specialist forensic input. Ten clinically based principles of care provision important to forensic mental health assertive community treatment were developed.

CONCLUSION

Deinstitutionalization in forensic psychiatry lags behind the rest of psychiatry, but can only occur with well-supported systems in place to assess and manage risk in the community setting. The development of community-based forensic rehabilitation services in conjunction with general mental health is indicated.

Community treatment orders: profile of a Canadian experience

OBJECTIVE

This study reports the first published Canadian profile of a sample of psychiatric patients from the Royal Ottawa Hospital in Ottawa, Ontario, who were issued community treatment orders (CTOs).

METHOD

We undertook a population study of sociodemographic and health care use patterns from January 2001 to September 2003, using a standardized information collection tool.

RESULTS

The issuance of CTOs was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the number and length of hospital admissions and increased use of supportive community-based services and supportive housing.

CONCLUSION

CTOs are effective tools for allowing patients to live in the least restrictive setting possible while they receive diverse services. They also effectively reduce rates and lengths of readmission to hospital.

A retrospective examination of outpatient commitment in New York

Outpatient commitment (OC) is a growing trend in mental health treatment. The impetus for this movement has been partly due to the public perception that some mentally ill outpatients are prone to violence as result of poor treatment compliance. Numerous studies have shown that poor treatment compliance is associated with increased hospitalization, substance abuse, homelessness, and contact with the criminal justice system. This study examined treatment effectiveness, demographic variables, hospital utilization, and violence among 100 OC participants in New York. Results indicate that OC can be an effective means of increasing treatment compliance and reducing hospitalization and encounters with the criminal justice system.

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.

Outpatient commitment: A therapeutic jurisprudence analysis

This article analyzes the legal and therapeutic jurisprudence considerations raised by outpatient commitment. Although older forms of outpatient commitment have both legal and therapeutic advantages, preventive outpatient commitment raises serious legal problems and potential antitherapeutic consequences that may outweigh its claimed therapeutic value. As a result, alternatives are proposed, including wider availability of community treatment and outreach and case management services, assertive community treatment, police and mental health court diversion programs, and creative uses of advanced directive instruments and behavioral contracting. Proposals also are made for how preventive outpatient commitment can be applied more therapeutically, including hearings that accord patients a sense of procedural justice and techniques designed to motivate individuals facing such hearings to agree to accept treatment voluntarily.

Endorsement of personal benefit of outpatient commitment among persons with severe mental illness

This study examines whether individuals who experienced involuntary outpatient commitment (OPC) attribute benefit to this intervention. It was found that the majority of experimental subjects who underwent a period of OPC did not personally endorse OPC's benefits at the end of the study, either because they did not think it improved treatment adherence or because they rejected their own need for continued treatment. However, at the end of the study, a positive appraisal of benefit was roughly twice as likely among subjects who actually experienced positive treatment outcomes. These data provide little support for acceptance and "gratitude" as a rationale to support decision making about OPC continuation. Rather, clinicians need to rely on other clinical and empirical data for such decision making.

Effects of involuntary outpatient commitment on subjective quality of life in persons with severe mental illness

Recent evidence suggests that involuntary outpatient commitment (OPC), when appropriately applied, can improve adherence with psychiatric treatment, decrease hospital recidivism and arrests, and lower the risk of violent behavior in persons with severe mental illness. Presumably these are benefits that improve quality of life (QOL); however, insofar as OPC involves legal coercion, the undesirable aspects of OPC could also exert a negative effect on quality of life, thus offsetting clinical benefits. Involuntarily hospitalized subjects, awaiting discharge under outpatient commitment, were randomly assigned to be released or continue under outpatient commitment in the community after hospital discharge, and were followed for one year. Quality of life was measured at baseline and 12 months follow-up. Treatment characteristics and clinical outcomes were also measured. Subjects who underwent longer periods of outpatient commitment had significantly greater quality of life as measured at the end of the 1 year study. Multivariable analysis showed that the effect of OPC on QOL was mediated by greater treatment adherence and lower symptom scores. However, perceived coercion moderated the effect of OPC on QOL. Involuntary outpatient commitment, when sustained over time, indirectly exerts a positive effect on subjective quality of life for persons with SMI, at least in part by improving treatment adherence and lowering symptomatology.

Caring for Persons with Serious Mental Illness: Policy and Practice Suggestions

This article places evidenced-based knowledge of practice within the social context of care and proposes five policy objectives and specific policy and program changes to address care needs of people with serious mental illness. In spite of demonstration programs that provide the basis for proposed policy initiatives throughout the United States, treatment provision for this population remains inadequate and their safety and well-being continues to be at risk. The authors suggest that treatment initiatives need to be tied to stable policies protecting the mentally ill from adverse social context changes. The authors conclude that policies are needed that will enhance housing assistance, independent social functioning, personal empowerment, and treatment engagement. In addition, efforts are needed to make better use of inpatient hospital care, to better understand the role of assisted treatment, and to better develop consistent long-term fiscal support for the seriously mentally ill. They offer specific policy recommendations for changes in HUD programs, Medicaid and Medicare funding, and treatment programming that address these needs.