Conditional release: a less restrictive alternative to hospitalization?

Latest findings highlight the continuing uncertainty over the utility of compulsory psychiatric treatment in the community

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been introduced in many jurisdictions with evidence of increasing use over time as well as a disproportionate use in marginalised populations. Rates of CTOs also vary widely, both internationally and within the same country, for reasons that are poorly understood. This is despite evidence for effectiveness being mixed and, as a result, there have been calls for a reappraisal of this type of legislation. In the UK, a parliamentary committee on reforming the existing Mental Health Act recommended abolishing CTOs other than for people in the criminal justice system. Two recent Australian papers based on large state-wide administrative data-sets give conflicting results and came to markedly different conclusions regarding the desirability of reducing CTO rates. The debate about the effectiveness of CTOs therefore remains unresolved. This is of concern beyond Australia, as other jurisdictions such as England, Scotland and Canada have similar clinician-initiated orders.

The benefits and harms of community treatment orders for people diagnosed with psychiatric illnesses: A rapid umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

AIMS

Community treatment orders have been introduced in many jurisdictions with increasing use over time. We conducted a rapid umbrella review to synthesise the quantitative and qualitative evidence from systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses of their potential harms and benefits.

METHODS

A systematic search of Medline, PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO for relevant systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses. Where available, participants on community treatment orders were compared with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. This review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023398767) and the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/zeq35).

RESULTS

In all, 17 publications from 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Quantitative synthesis of data from different systematic reviews was not possible. There were mixed findings on the effects of community treatment orders on health service use, and clinical, psychosocial or forensic outcomes. Whereas uncontrolled evidence suggested benefits, results were more equivocal from controlled studies and randomised controlled trials showed no effect. Any changes in health service use took several years to become apparent. There was evidence that better targeting of community treatment order use led to improved outcomes. Although there were other benefits, such as in mortality, findings were mostly rated as suggestive using predetermined and standardised criteria. Qualitative findings suggested that family members and clinicians were generally positive about the effect of community treatment orders but those subjected to them were more ambivalent. Any possible harms were under-researched, particularly in quantitative designs.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for the benefits of community treatment orders remains inconclusive. At the very least, use should be better targeted to people most likely to benefit. More quantitative research on harms is indicated.

Need for Treatment, A Less Restrictive Alternative to Hospitalization, and Treatment Provision: The Utility of Community Treatment Orders

Background

Provision of involuntary care is an abridgment of civil rights and a source of controversy. Its circumstances require continued monitoring. This study asks 4 questions: Whether, in an era, focused on allowing patients with capacity to refuse community-treatment-order (CTO)-assignments, CTO use decreased. And whether CTOs fulfilled 3 statute mandates: Were CTO-assigned patients in greater need of treatment than other psychiatric inpatients? Was CTO assignment a less-restrictive alternative to psychiatric hospitalization? and Did CTO assignment provide needed treatment at internationally recommended levels with consequences for patient outcomes?

Method

All 214 388 Victoria, Australia mental health admissions between 2000- 2017 were reviewed. Two cohort samples were drawn and followed through 2019-ie, all 7826 hospitalized patients who were first placed on CTOs from 2010 to 2017 and 13 896 hospitalized patients without CTO placement. Logistic Regression was used to specify determinants of CTO assignment from the psychiatric inpatient population. OLS Regression with propensity score control to evaluate study questions.

Results

In the 2010-2017 decade, initial CTO assignments decreased by 3.5%, and initial hospitalizations increased by 5.9% compared to the 2000-2009 period. At hospital admission and discharge, based on Health of the Nations Score ratings, the CTO-cohort's need for treatment exceeded that of non-CTO patients. CTO patients had 3.75 fewer days in average inpatient episode duration than other inpatients, when adjusted for CTO-assignment determinants, the ratio of patients to community case managers, and patient housing status. CTO patients needing rehospitalization spent 112.68 more days in the community than re-hospitalized non-CTO patients. Patient to case-manager ratios falling above recommended levels and the patient marginal housing status contributed to longer hospital stays and reduced community tenure.

Conclusions

Victoria relied less on CTOs as an LRA, consequently, experiencing increased initial hospitalizations. CTO patients were in greater need of treatment than non-CTO patients, yet, with required oversite had shorter hospitalizations and more time out of hospital prior to rehospitalization than the less severely ill non-CTO group. Patient LRA outcomes were adversely affected by higher than recommended community patient to case-manager ratios limiting needed treatment provision to hospital.

Protecting Health and Safety with Needed-Treatment: the Effectiveness of Outpatient Commitment

Outpatient civil commitment (OCC) requires the provision of needed-treatment, as a less restrictive alternative (LRA) to psychiatric-hospitalization in order to protect against imminent-threats to health and safety associated with severe mental illness (SMI). OCC-reviews aggregating all studies report inconsistent outcomes and interpret such as intervention failure. This review, considering those studies whose outcome criteria are consistent with the provisions of OCC-law, seeks to determine OCC-effectiveness in meeting its legislated objectives. This review incorporated studies from previous systematic-reviews, used their search methodology, and added investigations through August 2020. Selected OCC-studies evaluated samples of all eligible patients in a jurisdiction. Their outcome-measures were threats to health or safety or the receipt of needed-treatment exclusive of post-OCC-assignment- hospitalization, the latter being the OCC-default for providing needed-treatment in the absence of an LRA and dependent on bed-availability. A study's evidence-quality was evaluated with the Berkeley Evidence Ranking and the New Castle Ottawa systems. Thirty-nine OCC-outcome-studies in six-outcome-areas directly addressed OCC-statute objectives: 21 considered imminent threats to health and safety, 10 compliance with providing needed-treatment, and 8 conformity to the LRA-standard. With the top evidence-rank equal to one, the studies M = 2.55. OCC-assignment was associated with reducing mortality-risk, increasing access to acute-medical-care, and reducing risks of violence and victimization. It enabled reaching these objectives as a LRA to hospitalization and facilitated the use of community-services by individuals refusing such assistance when outside of OCC-supervision. OCC's appears to enable recovery by reducing potentially life-altering health and safety risks associated with SMI.

Hospital Utilization Outcomes Following Assignment to Outpatient Commitment

Outpatient civil commitment (OCC) requires people with severe mental illness (SMI) to receive needed-treatment addressing imminent-threats to health and safety. When available, such treatment is required to be provided in the community as a less restrictive alternative (LRA) to psychiatric-hospitalization. Variance in hospital-utilization outcomes following OCC-assignment has been interpreted as OCC-failure. This review seeks to specify factors accounting for this outcome-variation and to determine whether OCC is used effectively. Twenty-five studies, sited in seven meta-analyses and subsequently published investigations, assessing post-OCC-assignment hospital utilization outcomes were reviewed. Studies were grouped by structural pre-determinants of hospital-utilization and OCC-implementation-i.e. deinstitutionalization (bed-availability), availability of a less restrictive alternative to hospitalization, and illness severity. Design quality at study completion was ranked on causal-certainty. In OCC-follow-up-studies, deinstitutionalization associated hospital-bed-cuts, when not taken into account, ensured lower hospital-bed-day utilization. OCC-assignment coupled with aggressive case-management was associated with reduced-hospitalization. With limited community-service, hospitalizations increased as the default option for providing needed-treatment. Follow-up studies showed less hospitalization while on OCC-assignment and more outside of it. Studies using fixed-follow-up periods usually found increased-utilization as patients spent less time under OCC-supervision than outside it. Comparison-group-studies reporting no between-group differences bring more severely ill OCC-patients to equivalent use as less disturbed patients, a success. Mean evidence-rank for causal-certainty 2.96, range 2-4, of 5 with no study ranked 1, the highest rank. Diverse mental health systems yield diverse OCC hospital-utilization outcomes, each fulfilling the law's legal mandate to provide needed-treatment protecting health and safety.

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 utility of outpatient civil commitment: Investigating the evidence

BACKGROUND

Outpatient civil commitment (OCC), community treatment orders (CTOs) in European and Commonwealth nations, require the provision of needed-treatment to protect against imminent threats to health and safety. OCC-reviews aggregating all studies report inconsistent outcomes. This review, searches for consistency in OCC-outcomes by evaluating studies based on mental health system characteristics, measurement, and design principles.

METHODS

All previously reviewed OCC-studies and more recent investigations were grouped by their outcome-measures' relationship to OCC statute objectives. A study's evidence-quality ranking was assessed. Hospital and service-utilization outcomes were grouped by whether they represented treatment provision, patient outcome, or the conflation of both.

RESULTS

OCC-studies including direct health and safety outcomes found OCC associated with reduced mortality-risk, increased access to acute medical care, and reduced violence and victimization risks. Studies considering treatment-provision, found OCC associated with improved medication and service compliance. If coupled with assertive community treatment (ACT) or aggressive case management OCC was associated with enhanced ACT success in reducing hospitalization need. When outpatient-services were limited, OCC facilitated rapid return to hospital for needed-treatment and increased hospital utilization in the absence of a less restrictive alternative. OCC-studies measuring "total hospital days", "prevention of hospitalization", and "readmissions" report negative and/or no difference findings because they erroneously conflate their intervention (provision of needed treatment) and outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

This investigation finds replicated beneficial associations between OCC and direct measures of imminent harm indicating reductions in threats to health and safety. It also finds support for OCC as a less restrictive alternative to inpatient care.

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.

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.

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.

The utility of outpatient commitment: acute medical care access and protecting health

OBJECTIVES

This study considers whether, in an easy access single-payer health care system, patients placed on outpatient commitment-community treatment orders (CTOs) in Victoria Australia-are more likely to access acute medical care addressing physical illness than voluntary patients with and without severe mental illness.

METHOD

For years 2000 to 2010, the study compared acute medical care access of 27,585  severely mentally ill psychiatrically hospitalized patients (11,424 with and 16,161 without CTO exposure) and 12,229 never psychiatrically hospitalized outpatients (individuals with less morbidity risk as they were not considered to have severe mental illness). Logistic regression was used to determine the influence of the CTO on the likelihood of receiving a diagnosis of physical illness requiring acute care.

RESULTS

Validating their shared and elevated morbidity risk, 53% of each hospitalized cohort accessed acute care compared to 32% of outpatients during the decade. While not under mental health system supervision, however, the likelihood that a CTO patient would receive a physical illness diagnosis was 31% lower than for non-CTO patients, and no different from lower morbidity-risk outpatients without severe mental illness. While, under mental health system supervision, the likelihood that CTO patients would receive a physical illness diagnosis was 40% greater than non-CTO patients and 5.02 times more likely than outpatients were. Each CTO episode was associated with a 4.6% increase in the likelihood of a member of the CTO group receiving a diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Mental health system involvement and CTO supervision appeared to facilitate access to physical health care in acute care settings for patients with severe mental illness, a group that has, in the past, been subject to excess morbidity and mortality.

The Utility of Outpatient Commitment: I. A Need for Treatment and a Least Restrictive Alternative to Psychiatric Hospitalization

OBJECTIVES

This study examined whether psychiatric patients assigned to community treatment orders (CTOs), outpatient commitment in Victoria, Australia, have a greater need for treatment to protect their health and safety than patients not assigned to CTOs. It also considered whether such treatment is provided in a least restrictive manner-that is, in a way that contributes to reduced use of psychiatric hospitalization.

METHODS

The sample included 11,424 patients first placed on a CTO between 2000 and 2010, and 16,161 patients not placed on a CTO. Need for treatment was independently assessed with the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) at hospital admission and at discharge. Ordinary least-squares and Poisson regressions were used to assess savings in hospital days attributable to CTO placement.

RESULTS

HoNOS ratings indicated that at admission and discharge, the CTO cohort's need for treatment exceeded that of the non-CTO cohort, particularly in areas indicating potential dangerous behavior. When analyses adjusted for the propensity to be selected into the CTO cohort and other factors, the mean duration of an inpatient episode was 4.6 days shorter for the CTO cohort than for the non-CTO cohort, and a reduction of 10.4 days per inpatient episode was attributable to each CTO placement.

CONCLUSIONS

CTO placement may have helped patients with a greater need for treatment to experience shorter hospital stays. Whether the CTO directly enabled the fulfillment of unsought but required treatment needs that protected patient health and safety is a question that needs to be addressed in future research.

A systematic review of the views and experiences of subjects of community treatment orders

OBJECTIVE

CTOS have been the subject of many qualitative and quantitative research studies. Both research approaches add value to our understanding of CTOs. Qualitative studies provide an understanding of CTOs and the experience of being on a CTO that quantitative studies cannot provide. Many qualitative studies that have examined the views of subjects of CTOs have been published. However, authors of these studies continue to note that views and experiences of the subjects of these orders are not well known. This paper provides the results of a systematic review of qualitative studies focused on understanding the experiences of individuals who have been the subjects of CTOs.

METHOD

Relevant databases and grey literature were searched. To be included, a study had to have used a qualitative methodology for data collection and analysis, and focus on examining stakeholder perspectives on the lived experience of CTOs.

RESULTS

After a rigorous review of the abstracts, we identified 22 papers that met the criteria. These papers were analysed in detail in order to examine the existence of common themes. The 22 papers represented the views of 581 participants from 7 countries around the world. Ten themes were found to be common among the research findings of the 22 papers. Three themes in particular were highlighted: feelings of coercion and control, medication seen as the main reason for a CTO and that the perception of CTOs as a safety net. Findings also highlight the ambivalence that subjects of CTOs experience, the importance of the therapeutic relationship for successful engagement of the subject of the CTO and the complex role of coercion.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We have made a number of recommendations about how clinicians might use the views of the subjects of CTOs achieve a more positive experience of a CTO.

Denial of Access to Individuals Seeking Inpatient Care: Disposition Determinants and 12 Month Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study considers the denial of access to inpatient care to those seeking hospitalization following psychiatric emergency service (PES) evaluation. It evaluates how civil commitment criteria, functional status, institutional constraints, social bias, and procedural justice indicators are likely to impact denial of care decisions, and considers 12 month outcomes.

METHODS

PES evaluations of 583 patients in 9 California county general hospitals were examined via logit modeling to determine those factors contributing to the decision to deny access to inpatient care. Differences in the importance of influences on the decision making process and outcomes at 12 months are examined in two contrasts: first, admitted and released patients seeking care, then, the latter group versus all other patients. Outcome measures include numbers of deaths, violent crimes, and involuntary readmissions to the PES.

RESULTS

Of the patients evaluated, 8.4 % were denied access to inpatient care despite their avowed wish to be hospitalized. When compared to admitted patients seeking hospitalization or to all other patients, analyses show that clinicians relied on civil commitment admission criteria and the availability of a less restrictive alternative to the hospital in making decisions on patient retention. When compared with all other patients, the probability of unwanted release was greater for individuals evaluated in difficult circumstances, for those without insurance, and for those with higher functional status. Fewer deaths were observed in the group denied admission, though no other significant outcome differences were observed.

CONCLUSION

Dangerousness and mental disorder in the absence of a less restrictive alternative to hospitalization, along with an overall assessment of the patient's functional status, are effectively employed as triage criteria in determining who is denied access to inpatient care following PES evaluation. While some higher functioning individuals are subjected to a variant standard of access to inpatient care because of a lack of insurance, and endure the misfortune of being evaluated under difficult clinical circumstances, outcomes seem contingent on clinicians' ability to distinguish between groups on the aforementioned triage criteria.

Compulsory community and involuntary outpatient treatment for people with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

It is controversial whether compulsory community treatment (CCT) for people with severe mental illness (SMI) reduces health service use, or improves clinical outcome and social functioning.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of compulsory community treatment (CCT) for people with severe mental illness (SMI).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (2003, 2008, 2012, 8 November 2013, 3 June 2016). We obtained all references of identified studies and contacted authors where necessary.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of CCT compared with standard care for people with SMI (mainly schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like disorders, bipolar disorder, or depression with psychotic features). Standard care could be voluntary treatment in the community or another pre-existing form of CCT such as supervised discharge.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Authors independently selected studies, assessed their quality and extracted data. We used Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias. For binary outcomes, we calculated a fixed-effect risk ratio (RR), its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and, where possible, the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). For continuous outcomes, we calculated a fixed-effect mean difference (MD) and its 95% CI. We used the GRADE approach to create 'Summary of findings' tables for key outcomes and assessed the risk of bias of these findings.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included three studies (n = 749). Two were based in the USA and one in England. The English study had the least bias, meeting three out of the seven criteria of Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias. The two other studies met only one criterion, the majority being rated unclear.Two trials from the USA (n = 416) compared court-ordered 'outpatient commitment' (OPC) with entirely voluntary community treatment. There were no significant differences between OPC and voluntary treatment by 11 to 12 months in any of the main health service or participant level outcome indices: service use - readmission to hospital (2 RCTs, n= 416, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.21, low-quality evidence); service use - compliance with medication (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19, low-quality evidence); social functioning - arrested at least once (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.52, low-quality evidence); social functioning - homelessness (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.15, low-quality evidence); or satisfaction with care - perceived coercion (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.89, low-quality evidence). However, one trial found the risk of victimisation decreased with OPC (1 RCT, n = 264, RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.80, low-quality evidence).The other RCT compared community treatment orders (CTOs) with less intensive and briefer supervised discharge (Section 17) in England. The study found no difference between the two groups for either the main health service outcomes including readmission to hospital by 12 months (1 RCT, n = 333, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.32, moderate-quality evidence), or any of the participant level outcomes. The lack of any difference between the two groups persisted at 36 months' follow-up.Combining the results of all three trials did not alter these results. For instance, participants on any form of CCT were no less likely to be readmitted than participants in the control groups whether on entirely voluntary treatment or subject to intermittent supervised discharge (3 RCTs, n = 749, RR for readmission to hospital by 12 months 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.16 moderate-quality evidence). In terms of NNTB, it would take 142 orders to prevent one readmission. There was no clear difference between groups for perceived coercion by 12 months (3 RCTs, n = 645, RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.71, moderate-quality evidence).There were no data for adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These review data show CCT results in no clear difference in service use, social functioning or quality of life compared with voluntary care or brief supervised discharge. People receiving CCT were, however, less likely to be victims of violent or non-violent crime. It is unclear whether this benefit is due to the intensity of treatment or its compulsory nature. Short periods of conditional leave may be as effective (or non-effective) as formal compulsory treatment in the community. Evaluation of a wide range of outcomes should be considered when this legislation is introduced. However, conclusions are based on three relatively small trials, with high or unclear risk of blinding bias, and low- to moderate-quality evidence. In addition, clinical trials may not fully reflect the potential benefits of this complex intervention.

Housing Trajectories of Forensic Psychiatric Patients

The objectives of this study were to describe the disposition and housing trajectories of individuals found Not Criminally Responsible on account of Mental Disorder (NCRMD), and the factors that predict different trajectories. To do so, disposition and housing status were coded for 934 NCRMD patients over a 36-month follow-up period. Sequential data analysis resulted in four distinct trajectories: detention in hospital, conditional discharge in supportive housing, conditional discharge in independent housing, and absolute discharge to unknown housing. The likelihood of a placement in supportive housing compared with detention significantly decreased for individuals with a higher index offense severity. Less restrictive trajectories were significantly predicted by clinical factors. The results revealed little change in the disposition and housing trajectories of NCRMD patients. Furthermore, decisions about disposition and housing placement reflect a knowledge-practice gap between risk factors known to be predictive of community resources use in the forensic population. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Passageway: A Novel Approach to Success of Conditional Release - Principles and Constructs of the Model Residential Program for the Forensic Mentally III Patient

With the advent of psychotropic medications and with the deinstitutionalization of psychiatry starting in 1968, patients were prematurely discharged from forensic state hospitals. Due to lack of resources, psychiatric forensic patients ended up in the correctional system or homeless with the reduction of psychiatric beds in forensic and civil state hospitals. Lacking proper training and medication management, the recidivism rate of this population was close to 10% for rearrest and about 35% for revocation of conditional release (CR; Manguno-Mire et al., ). A new treatment modality was created to successfully transition patients from the forensic state hospital system to the community. This article describes and analyzes the principles and constructs of Passageway, a model residential program for patients found not guilty by reason of insanity or those incompetent to proceed to CR. The CR allows for a program like Passageway to be successful in transitioning patients back into the community. This is accomplished with minimal government funding, and since 1982 has resulted in a 0% recidivism rate, for any known arrests or convictions and for recommittal of a felony, defined in the state of Florida as, "any criminal offense that is punishable under the laws of this state, or that would be punishable, if committed in this state, by death or imprisonment in a state penitentiary. " (Fla. Stat. § 775.08). Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Effectiveness of Community Treatment Orders: The International Evidence

OBJECTIVE

Community treatment orders (CTOs) exist in more than 75 jurisdictions worldwide. This review outlines findings from the international literature on CTO effectiveness.

METHOD

The article draws on 2 comprehensive systematic reviews of the literature published before 2013, then uses the same search terms to identify studies published between 2013 and 2015. The focus is on what the literature as a whole tells us about CTO effectiveness, with particular emphasis on the strength and weaknesses of different methodologies.

RESULTS

The results from more than 50 nonrandomized studies show mixed results. Some show benefits from CTOs while others show none on the most frequently reported outcomes of readmission, time in hospital, and community service use. Results from the 3 existing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show no effect of CTOs on a wider range of outcome measures except that patients on CTOs are less likely than controls to be a victim of crime. Patients on CTOs are, however, likely to have their liberty restricted for significantly longer periods of time. Meta-analyses pooling patient data from RCTs and high quality nonrandomized studies also find no evidence of patient benefit, and systematic reviews come to the same conclusion.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence of patient benefit from current CTO outcome studies. This casts doubt over the usefulness and ethics of CTOs. To remove uncertainty, future research must be designed as RCTs.

Impact of involuntary out-patient commitment on reducing hospital services: 2-year follow-up

Aims and method To evaluate whether involuntary out-patient commitment (OPC) in patients with severe mental disorder reduces their use of hospital services. This is a retrospective case-control study comparing a group of patients on OPC (n = 75) and a control group (n = 75) which was composed of patients whose sociodemographic variables and clinical characteristics were similar to those of the OPC group. Each control case is paired with an OPC case, so the control case must have an involuntary admission in the month that the index OPC case admission occurred. Emergency room visits, admissions and average length of hospital stay over a 2-year follow-up after the initiation of OPC were compared. Results No statistically significant evidence was found in the use of mental healthcare services between the two groups. Different reasons for admission found between the groups limit similarity when comparing the two. Clinical implications The findings cast doubt over the effectiveness of this legal measure to reduce emergency visits, the number of admissions and the length of stay in the hospital.

Retrospective assessment of factors associated with readmission in a large psychiatric hospital in Guangzhou, China

Background

Most psychiatric inpatients in China are involuntarily admitted by their families, resulting in relatively long admissions and relatively low readmission rates. However, this pattern may change after implementation of China’s new national mental health law (promulgated in 2013), which restricts involuntary psychiatric admissions to the small proportion of mentally ill individuals who are a danger to self or others.

Aim

Assess the factors associated with readmission rates of psychiatric inpatients in Guangzhou, China.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of data from the Guangzhou Psychiatric Hospital, one of the largest psychiatric hospitals in China, used Cox regression models to evaluate the relationship between age, gender, diagnosis, marital status, employment status, relationship with the primary caregiver, type of medical insurance, length of stay of the index admission, and the number of previous admissions to estimate the risk of readmission over the year following discharge. Multivariate regression is used to assess factors associated with the total time of readmission during the year of follow-up.

Results

Among 3455 patients admitted from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2012 who had a mean (sd) length of stay of 65.7 (66.3) days, 476 (13.8%) were readmitted one or more times within one year of discharge. After considering all potential predictors of readmission in a multivariate survival analysis, the number of previous hospitalizations prior to the index admission was the only statistically significant predictor of readmission. The only factor that was significantly related to the total time of readmission was the duration of the index admission.

Conclusion

Shorter length of stay was not associated with increased readmission rates in patients admitted to a large public psychiatric hospital in southern China. This suggests that the expected decrease in the length of psychiatric inpatient admissions that is likely to occur when, based on China’s new regulations, most patients are admitted voluntarily may not lead to increased rates of readmission. Prospective studies with a more comprehensive set of outcome measures (including patient functioning, medication adherence, and family burden) are needed to monitor the effect of the law on patients and on the distribution of mental health services.

Community treatment orders in New Zealand: regional variability and international comparisons

OBJECTIVES

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been used in New Zealand since 1992 and are now used in most Commonwealth countries. There is little research on the rate of use of CTOs in New Zealand. This study compares the prevalence of CTO use across New Zealand's 20 health districts and makes comparisons with international prevalence rates.

METHODS

New Zealand Ministry of Health reports provided data on rates of CTO use in New Zealand between 2005 and 2011. International rates were obtained from published reports and academic literature on CTO use.

RESULTS

Rates of CTO use in New Zealand show marked and persistent regional variation over the period of data collection. National average rates increased from 58 per 100,000 in 2005 to 84 per 100,000 in 2011. Rates of use of CTOs are increasing internationally. New Zealand's CTO use is high by international comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

New Zealand's high and increasing rate of CTO use by international standards raises questions about the delivery and functioning of mental health services, and about mental health service users' experience of mental health care. The high rate of CTO use needs to be addressed as a human rights issue as well as a clinical issue.

Do we need community treatment orders in Ireland?

OBJECTIVES

Re-admissions to inpatient psychiatric care are now so frequent as to be designated the 'revolving door' phenomenon and constitute 72% of admissions to Irish inpatient psychiatric units and hospitals. It is commonly believed that treatment non-adherence with aftercare following inpatient discharge contributes to readmission. Attempts to improve adherence and reduce or shorten readmission through compulsory community treatment orders have been made in several countries including Scotland in 2005 and, from November 2008, England and Wales. Provision for conditional discharge in Ireland has already been furnished by the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 but has been compromised by the inability to impose enforcement of conditions. The paper aims to determine whether compulsory community treatment orders are effective in improving adherence and reducing re-admission and whether, in consequence, their introduction in Ireland should be considered.

METHOD

The legislative measures adopted to improve treatment adherence and thereby reduce re-admissions are presented. The evidence of their effectiveness is examined.

RESULTS

Evaluation of the effectiveness of community treatment orders is limited and hindered by confounding factors. What evidence there is does not provide convincing evidence of their utility.

CONCLUSIONS

It is concluded that there is insufficient evidence to advocate their early introduction in Ireland in civil mental health legislation. Instead a wait and see policy is suggested with critical assessment of the outcome of such developments in Scotland and England and Wales. In addition further research on the characteristics of revolving door patients in Ireland and the circumstances determining their readmission is advocated. There is an anomaly in the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 which allows of conditional discharge but does not provide for its enforcement.

Patient attitudes towards compulsory community treatment orders and advance directives

Objectives: The Mental Health Act 2001 was implemented in Ireland in 2006, however, within this new legislation there is no provision for compulsory community treatment or advance directives, which are now established practice in other countries. We aimed to determine the proportion of patients who believe that compulsory treatment may be justified, the preference for where the treatment should be delivered and factors which may influence this preference. We also sought to determine the proportion of people who would be interested in the option of having an advance directive in their future care plan.

Methods: Patients who had been admitted involuntarily in a 183 bedded psychiatric hospital in Dublin (St John of God Hospital) over a 15 month period were interviewed one year following discharge. A structured interview was used and included the Birchwood Insight Scale and Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI).

Results: Sixty-seven patients were interviewed, which resulted in a follow-up rate of 68%. A total of 56% of participants believe that there are situations in which involuntary treatment with medication may be justified. Of the participants 59% think that the person should be admitted to hospital if they are going to be administered medication without consent. A total of 41 % of participants stated they would have preferred to have been treated at home rather than hospital and this was associated with having a diagnosis of an affective disorder or it being their first involuntary admission. Of the participants 84% expressed interest in having the option of an advance directive in their treatment care plan.

Conclusions: With the increasing community based provision of mental health services in Ireland a debate on compulsory community treatment orders and advance directives needs to take place amongst all stakeholders.

Clinical stability in the community associated with long-term approved leave under the Mental Health Act 2001

Introduction We present the case of a 27-year-old man with a background diagnosis of treatment resistant schizophrenia and absent insight who for the last 3 years has been residing in a high support residential setting on approved leave under the Mental Health Act (MHA) 2001. The case demonstrates how this man achieved clinical stability in the community with the assistance of long-term involuntary admission under the MHA 2001, in contrast to the previous years of his illness in which he had suffered multiple relapses of his psychotic illness with ssociated distress, poor self-care and repeated in-patient re-admissions. We discuss the equivalent use of community treatment orders in other jurisdictions and how the judicious use of approved leave under the MHA 2001 may be used as an alternative in Ireland where community treatment orders are not currently available.

METHOD

Case Report.

CONCLUSION

The case report highlights how the use of long-term approved leave under the MHA2001 may be used as alternative in Ireland to mimic CTOs for certain difficult to treat patients with psychotic illness who would benefit from ongoing treatment, but lack capacity to engage in such treatment due to persistent symptoms and lack of insight.

A systematic review of the effect of community treatment orders on service use

PURPOSE

The evidence regarding community treatment order effectiveness has been conflicting. This systematic review aims to bring up to date the review performed by Churchill and colleagues in 2005 by assessing and interpreting evidence of CTO effectiveness defined by admission rates, number of inpatient days, community service use, and medication adherence published since 2006.

METHOD

Databases were searched to obtain relevant studies published from January 2006 to March 2013.

RESULTS

18 studies including one randomised controlled trial were included. There remains lack of evidence from randomised and non-randomised studies that CTOs are associated with or affected by admission rates, number of inpatient days or community service use. The most recent and largest RCT is included in this review and found no significant impact on admission rate (RR = 1.0, 95% CI 0.75-1.33) or number of days in hospital (IR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.65-1.26). Results from the two largest longitudinal datasets included in this review do not concur. Studies using the New York dataset found that CTOs were associated with reduced admission rates and inpatient days, while studies using the Victoria dataset generally found that they were associated with increased admission rates and inpatient days.

CONCLUSION

There is now robust evidence in the literature that CTOs have no significant effects on hospitalisation and other service use outcomes. Non-randomised studies continue to report conflicting results. Distinguishing between CTO recall and revocation and different patterns of community contact is needed in future research to ensure differentiation between CTO process and outcome.

Compulsory community and involuntary outpatient treatment for people with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

There is controversy as to whether compulsory community treatment (CCT) for people with severe mental illness (SMI) reduces health service use, or improves clinical outcome and social functioning.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of CCT for people with SMI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register and Science Citation Index (2003, 2008, and 2012). We obtained all references of identified studies and contacted authors where necessary. We further updated this search on the 8 November 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of CCT compared with standard care for people with SMI (mainly schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like disorders, bipolar disorder, or depression with psychotic features). Standard care could be voluntary treatment in the community or another pre-existing form of compulsory community treatment such as supervised discharge.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, assessed their quality and extracted data. We used The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. For binary outcomes, we calculated a fixed-effect risk ratio (RR), its 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where possible, the weighted number needed to treat statistic (NNT). For continuous outcomes, we calculated a fixed-effect mean difference (MD) and its 95% CI. We used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to create a 'Summary of findings' table for outcomes we rated as important and assessed the risk of bias of included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

All studies (n=3) involved patients in community settings who were followed up over 12 months (n = 752 participants).Two RCTs from the USA (total n = 416) compared court-ordered 'Outpatient Commitment' (OPC) with voluntary community treatment. OPC did not result in significant differences compared to voluntary treatment in any of the main outcome indices: health service use (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for readmission to hospital by 11-12 months 0.98 CI 0.79 to 1.21, low grade evidence); social functioning (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for arrested at least once by 11-12 months 0.97 CI 0.62 to 1.52, low grade evidence); mental state; quality of life (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for homelessness 0.67 CI 0.39 to 1.15, low grade evidence) or satisfaction with care (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for perceived coercion 1.36 CI 0.97 to 1.89, low grade evidence). However, risk of victimisation decreased with OPC (1 RCT, n = 264, RR 0.50 CI 0.31 to 0.80). Other than perceived coercion, no adverse outcomes were reported. In terms of numbers needed to treat (NNT), it would take 85 OPC orders to prevent one readmission, 27 to prevent one episode of homelessness and 238 to prevent one arrest. The NNT for the reduction of victimisation was lower at six (CI 6 to 6.5).One further RCT compared community treatment orders (CTOs) with less intensive supervised discharge in England and found no difference between the two for either the main outcome of readmission (1 RCT, n = 333, RR for readmission to hospital by 12 months 0.99 CI 0.74 to 1.32, medium grade evidence), or any of the secondary outcomes including social functioning and mental state. It was not possible to calculate the NNT. The English study met three out of the seven criteria of The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias, the others only one, the majority being rated unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CCT results in no significant difference in service use, social functioning or quality of life compared with standard voluntary care. People receiving CCT were, however, less likely to be victims of violent or non-violent crime. It is unclear whether this benefit is due to the intensity of treatment or its compulsory nature. Short periods of conditional leave may be as effective (or non-effective) as formal compulsory treatment in the community. Evaluation of a wide range of outcomes should be considered when this legislation is introduced. However, conclusions are based on three relatively small trials, with high or unclear risk of blinding bias, and evidence we rated as low to medium quality.

Community treatment orders: current evidence and the implications

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been widely introduced to address the problems faced by 'revolving door' patients. A number of case-control studies have been conducted but show conflicting results concerning the effectiveness of CTOs. The Oxford Community Treatment Order Evaluation Trial (OCTET) is the third randomised controlled trial (RCT) to show that CTOs do not reduce rates of readmission over 12 months, despite restricting patients' autonomy. This evidence gives pause for thought about current CTO practice. Further high-quality RCTs may settle the contentious debate about effectiveness.

An eleven-year evaluation of the effect of community treatment orders on changes in mental health service use

Many studies of compulsory community treatment have assessed their effect early on after the implementation of legislation. Although compulsory community treatment may not prevent readmission to hospital, there is evidence of an effect on length of stay before and after the intervention when compared to controls. This paper examines whether outcomes change as clinicians gain experience in the use of community treatment orders (CTOs). Cases and controls from three linked Western Australian databases were matched on age, sex, diagnosis and time of hospital discharge or community placement. We compared changes in bed-days and outpatient visits of CTO cases and controls using multivariate analyses to further control for confounders. We identified 2958 CTO cases and controls from November 1997 to December 2008 (total n = 5916). The average age was 37 years and 64% were male. Schizophrenia and other non-affective psychoses were the commonest diagnoses (73%). CTO placement was associated with a mean decrease of 5 bed-days from before the order when compared to controls (B = -5.23, s.e. = 1.60, t = -3.26, p < 0.001). There was an increase of 8 days in outpatient contacts (B = 8.31, s.e. = 1.17, t = 7.11, p < 0.001). There was little change in CTO use and outcomes over the 11 years. Compared to controls, CTOs may therefore reduce lengths of stay from before placement on the order. They also increase outpatient contacts. This study illustrates the importance of selecting an outcome that directly addresses the objective of the intervention.

Compulsory community and involuntary outpatient treatment for people with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

There is controversy as to whether compulsory community treatment for people with severe mental illnesses reduces health service use, or improves clinical outcome and social functioning. Given the widespread use of such powers it is important to assess the effects of this type of legislation.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the clinical and cost effectiveness of compulsory community treatment for people with severe mental illness.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We undertook searches of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register 2003, 2008, and Science Citation Index. We obtained all references of identified studies and contacted authors of each included study.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled clinical trials of compulsory community treatment compared with standard care for people with severe mental illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably selected and quality assessed studies and extracted data. For binary outcomes, we calculated a fixed effects risk ratio (RR), its 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where possible, the weighted number needed to treat/harm statistic (NNT/H).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified two randomised clinical trials (total n = 416) of court-ordered 'Outpatient Commitment' (OPC) from the USA. We found little evidence that compulsory community treatment was effective in any of the main outcome indices: health service use (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for readmission to hospital by 11-12 months 0.98 CI 0.79 to 1.2); social functioning (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for arrested at least once by 11-12 months 0.97 CI 0.62 to 1.52); mental state; quality of life (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for homelessness 0.67 CI 0.39 to 1.15) or satisfaction with care (2 RCTs, n = 416, RR for perceived coercion 1.36 CI 0.97 to 1.89). However, risk of victimisation may decrease with OPC (1 RCT, n = 264, RR 0.5 CI 0.31 to 0.8). In terms of numbers needed to treat (NNT), it would take 85 OPC orders to prevent one readmission, 27 to prevent one episode of homelessness and 238 to prevent one arrest. The NNT for the reduction of victimisation was lower at six (CI 6 to 6.5). A new search for trials in 2008 did not find any new trials that were relevant to this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compulsory community treatment results in no significant difference in service use, social functioning or quality of life compared with standard care. People receiving compulsory community treatment were, however, less likely to be victims of violent or non-violent crime. It is unclear whether this benefit is due to the intensity of treatment or its compulsory nature. Evaluation of a wide range of outcomes should be considered when this type of legislation is introduced.

The impact of mental health nursing education on undergraduate nursing students' attitudes to consumer participation

Consumer participation in all aspects of mental health service delivery, including the education of mental health professionals, is now a policy expectation in Australia. Whether education programs introducing nurses to mental health nursing lead to more favourable attitudes towards consumer participation is yet to be examined in pre-registration nursing programs in Australia. The current evaluation examined changes in scores for the Consumer Participation Survey for undergraduate nursing students (n = 68) in an Australian University. Data were analysed, using repeated measures t-test, to compare the pre- and post-test scores. There was a significant improvement in views on consumers participating as staff members. There were no statistically significant changes in attitudes towards consumer capacity and consumer involvement in care processes. Consumer participation in mental health care is now clearly articulated in Australian Government policy. For this to be successfully implemented a more comprehensive understanding of the ability of education to influence attitudes is required.

Risk factors for psychiatric re-hospitalization: an exploration

Predecessor research suggests that anything from 37% to 53% of hospitalized service users are readmitted within 12 months of discharge. This cycle of frequent admissions represents a serious challenge to clinicians and service users alike. Critically, much of the research in this field has relied exclusively on professional attributions for readmission with little acknowledgement of service user or patient viewpoints. This paper reports on a phenomenological study which used multiple data collection approaches to explore service user and clinician attributions for frequent hospitalization to an identified psychiatric unit over a 24-month index period. Methods included a retrospective review of multi-professional case notes, clinician and service user semi-structured interviews, and focus groups. Service users cited 'situational circumstances', rather than medically accepted relapse indicators such as 'non-adherence with prescribed medication' as the main reasons for readmission. Notable disagreement existed between clinician and service user data sources. Hospitalization is a complex, individually determined experience. Clinicians and service users have differing perspectives on the causal risk factors and this presents complications for those developing relapse prevention strategies. However, a shared appreciation of the multiple realities paves the way for the development of a conceptual risk-factor identification model which may serve as a guide to practitioners in relapse prevention.

Reducing the revolving door phenomenon

OBJECTIVES

De-institutionalisation and the expansion of community services have resulted in a reduction in the number of inpatient admissions in Ireland having fallen by 31% between 1986 and 2006. However, despite this, readmissions continue to account for over 70% of all admissions. The policy document A Vision for Change identified many shortcomings in the current model of provision of mental health services, making recommendations for the future development of community-based services with emphasis on outreach components such as homecare, crisis intervention and assertive outreach approaches. These recommendations are reviewed in relation to readmissions and the impact they may have on reducing the revolving door phenomenon.

METHOD

Three main intervention programmes essential to the delivery of an effective community-based service outlined and recommended by A Vision for Change, along with other pertinent factors, are discussed in relation to how they might reduce readmissions in Ireland. A series of Pearson correlations between Irish inpatient admissions rates and rates of outpatient attendances and provision of community mental health services are carried out and examined to explain possible relationships between increasing/decreasing admission rates and provision/attendances at community services. International literature is reviewed to determine the effectiveness of these intervention programmes in reducing admissions and readmissions and their relevance to the Irish situation is discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst A Vision for Change goes a long way towards advocating a more person-centred, recovery oriented and integrated model of service delivery, it is apparent from the consistently high proportion of readmissions in Ireland that there are still many shortcomings in service provision. The availability of specialised community-based programmes of care is as yet relatively uncommon in Ireland and uneven in geographical distribution. A considerable improvement in their provision, quantitatively and qualitatively, is required to impact on the revolving door phenomenon. In addition a re-configuration of existing catchment populations is required if they are to be successfully introduced and expanded.

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.

Conditional release in Western Australia: effect on hospital length of stay

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to determine whether the introduction of community treatment orders, which allow for conditional release from a psychiatric hospital, reduced inpatient episode durations in Western Australia by providing an alternative to extended inpatient stays.

METHODS

The design compared 129 persons given community treatment orders and 117 matched control patients without such orders-all of whom were hospitalized during the same period both before and after the introduction of the community treatment order law that allows for conditional release. A multivariate analysis of covariance was used to evaluate the impact of community treatment orders on change in inpatient episode duration.

RESULTS

The model showed a significant effect on inpatient episode duration (R(2)=.23, adjusted R(2)=.17, N=243, F=3.99, df=17 and 226, p<.001), indicating that community treatment orders (after taking all control factors into account) enabled a 19.16-day reduction per episode of inpatient care (t=2.13, df=1, p=.034) for persons given conditional release. Community-initiated treatment orders intended to prevent hospitalization, yet failing to do so, were associated with increased duration of subsequent hospitalizations (35.18 days; t=-3.36, df=1, p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Community treatment orders can be a useful tool for some but not necessarily all objectives. In the form of conditional release, orders reduce the likelihood of extended hospital stays. As a means to prevent hospitalization, the utility of community treatment orders is more complex, being dependent on services provided and on the judicious selection of persons for these orders.

Preventing psychiatric hospitalization and involuntary outpatient commitment

Over the course of a decade in Victoria, Australia, this study considered how, for whom, under what circumstances, and with what consequences for a patient's treatment career involuntary outpatient commitment was used to prevent psychiatric hospitalization. Records were obtained from the Victorian Psychiatric Case Register for patients with career hospitalizations, 8,879 exposed to outpatient orders. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to determine the characteristics of patients solely selected for placement on orders directly from the community, in lieu of re-hospitalization, versus patients selected for placement on orders only from the hospital or for those who experienced both hospital and community-initiated orders. Ordinary least squares regression was used to evaluate the relationship of sole reliance on community-initiated orders and experienced changes in future hospital utilization. Outpatient orders were infrequently issued directly from the community by comparison with orders issued at termination of inpatient episodes. Patients whose placements on orders were carried out only through direct community placement differed from those whose placement was primarily initiated from hospital or from both hospital and community. The former group, while largely comprised of people with schizophrenia, was less likely to include such patients than the comparison samples. It also included fewer males and "never married" individuals as well as more individuals with major affective disorders. Those served solely with community-initiated orders showed significantly less use of subsequent inpatient care than individuals in the comparison samples, all other diagnostic and pre-morbid adjustment characteristics taken into account. For patients at risk of beginning a career of long-term psychiatric hospitalization, sole reliance on community-initiated orders appeared to prevent additional hospital involvement. The issuance of orders from hospital and the combined-order strategy were associated with protective oversight throughout extended inpatient careers. Sole reliance on community-initiated outpatient orders provided a "least restrictive" alternative to hospitalization.

Use of community treatment orders to prevent psychiatric hospitalization

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to analyse how, for whom, under what circumstances, and with what consequences for a patient's treatment career the community treatment orders (CTOs) were used to prevent psychiatric hospitalization during the course of a decade in Victoria, Australia.

METHOD

Records were obtained from the Victorian Psychiatric Case Register for 8579 patients who were exposed to CTOs. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to determine the characteristics of patients solely selected for placement on orders directly from the community, in lieu of hospitalization, versus patients selected for placement on orders only from the hospital or for those who experienced both hospital- and community-initiated orders. Ordinary least squares regression was used to evaluate the relationship of sole reliance on community-initiated orders and experienced changes in future hospital utilization.

RESULTS

CTOs were infrequently issued directly from the community by comparison with outpatient orders issued at termination of inpatient episodes. Patients whose placements on orders were carried out only through direct community placement differed from those whose placement was primarily initiated from hospital or from both hospital and community. The former group, although largely consisting of people with schizophrenia, was less likely to include such patients than the comparison samples. It also included fewer male subjects and 'never married' individuals as well as more individuals with major affective disorders. Those served solely with community-initiated orders had significantly less use of subsequent inpatient care than individuals in the comparison samples, all other diagnostic and pre-morbid adjustment characteristics taken into account.

CONCLUSION

For patients at risk of beginning a career of long-term psychiatric hospitalization, sole reliance on community-initiated orders appeared to prevent additional hospital involvement. The issuance of orders from hospital and the combined-order strategy were associated with protective oversight throughout extended inpatient careers. Sole reliance on community-initiated outpatient orders provided a 'least restrictive' alternative to hospitalization.

Case registers in psychiatry: do they still have a role for research and service monitoring?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To follow up on reviews of case register research. Literature searches over a 2-year period were conducted to determine whether psychiatric case registers still have a role for research and service monitoring.

RECENT FINDINGS

Case register research covers a wide range of topics, and is most often found in Denmark where national databases support all kinds of record linkage studies. Typically, case registers are used in studies of treated prevalence and incidence of psychiatric disorders, in research on patterns of care, as sampling frames in epidemiological studies, and in studies on risk factors and treatment outcome.

SUMMARY

Despite a wide range of research based on administrative data, stakeholders in most countries are probably not well served by current priorities. Few studies investigate longitudinal patterns of service use to evaluate healthcare policies. There is a lack of comparative record linkage studies to inform local authorities on the cooperation between mental healthcare and public services. Implementing standard tools and procedures for routine outcome assessment seems still to be in an early phase in most register areas. When case register staff can capitalize on new opportunities, old and new case registers will continue to be important for research and service monitoring.

Does compulsory or supervised community treatment reduce 'revolving door' care? Legislation is inconsistent with recent evidence

Supervised community treatment to address 'revolving door' care is part of the new Mental Health Act in England and Wales. Two recent epidemiological studies in Australia (n>118 000), as well as a systematic review of all previous literature using appropriately matched or randomised controls (n=1108), suggest that it is unlikely to help.

Effect of conditional release from hospitalization on mortality risk

OBJECTIVES

This study considered the protective value provided by conditional release. It assessed the contribution of conditional release to mortality risk among patients with mental disorders severe enough to require psychiatric hospitalization during a mental health treatment span of 13.5 years in Victoria, Australia.

METHODS

Death records were obtained from the Australian National Death Index for a sample of 24,973 Victorian Psychiatric Case Register patients with a history of psychiatric hospitalizations: 8,879 had experienced at least one conditional release during community care intervals and 16,094 had not. Risk of death was assessed with standardized mortality ratios of the general population of Victoria. Relative risk of death among patients with and without past experience of conditional release was computed with risk and odds ratios. The contribution of conditional release to mortality, taking into account use of community care services, age, gender, inpatient experience, and diagnosis, as well as other controls, was assessed with logistic regression.

RESULTS

Patients who had been hospitalized showed higher mortality risk than the general population. Sixteen percent (4,034) died. Patients exposed to conditional release, however, had a 14 percent reduction in probability of non-injury-related death and a 24 percent reduction per day on orders in the probability of death from injury compared with those not offered such oversight throughout their mental health treatment, all other factors taken into account.

CONCLUSIONS

Conditional release can offer protective oversight for those considered dangerous to self or others and appears to reduce mortality risk among those with disorders severe enough to require psychiatric hospitalization.

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.