New directions in research on involuntary outpatient commitment

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.

A comparison of treatment adherence in individuals with a first episode of psychosis and inpatients with psychosis

In predicting treatment compliance in individuals with severe mental illness, research has focused on variables such as substance abuse, personality, history of child abuse, and symptomatology, although these relationships have not been investigated in great detail in individuals at the onset of mental illness. To better understand these correlates of treatment compliance, two samples were examined: a sample of 117 individuals presenting with a first episode of psychosis and a more chronic forensic sample of 65 participants recruited from a psychiatric hospital. These samples were investigated for service engagement in terms of violence history, substance abuse, symptom severity, psychopathic traits and history of childhood abuse. Linear regressions performed for the first episode sample revealed that childhood physical abuse was the strongest predictor of poor service engagement, followed by problems with alcohol, a history of physical violence, any history of violence and higher psychopathic traits. Linear regression revealed for the forensic group that a lower level of service engagement was most strongly predicted by a history of childhood abuse and a higher score on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Results are presented in light of the existing literature and clinical implications are discussed.

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.

Comparative effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia

Chlorpromazine, which was discovered in 1952, has an exhaustively characterized efficacy/safety profile comprising serious limitations: effectiveness in the field failing to match efficacy in trials, residual symptoms in 50% of patients, a 20% relapse rate in compliant patients, and worrisome extrapyramidal side effects, including tardive dyskinesia in 5% per year. Second-generation "atypical" antipsychotics bypass these effects by having less affinity for the dopamine D(2) receptor and affinities for other neuroreceptors. Clozapine, the lead atypical antipsychotic, was followed in the mid 1990s by risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine, which now account for over half of new antipsychotic prescriptions in North America, The debate over their relative efficacy involves the potential well-being of millions of schizophrenics and billions of dollars. Atypical antipsychotics are considerably more expensive; evidence for their superiority is highly variable and often inadequate, largely confined to short-term regulatory studies. Their effects on long-term outcome (particularly negative symptoms), relapse prevention, social and vocational functioning, suicide prevention and quality of life, and family and caregiver burden are largely unknown. The National institute of Mental Health's Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) project is a combined efficacy-effectiveness trial that aims to answer these questions in a broad range of patients with schizophrenia and Alzheimer's disease.

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.

Changes in guideline-recommended medication possession after implementing Kendra's law in New York

OBJECTIVE

This study examined changes in possession of guideline-recommended medication among three groups of New York State Medicaid enrollees with severe mental illness: those who received an involuntary outpatient commitment order, voluntary enhanced services, or neither of these interventions.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted with New York State Medicaid claims data for enrollees with bipolar, schizophrenia, or schizoaffective disorders in New York City, Long Island, and the Hudson River regions from 2000 to 2005 (N=7,762). With adjustment for clinical and demographic characteristics, logistic regression models predicted the probability of a monthly medication possession ratio (MPR) ≥ 80% for medications recommended by expert guidelines or by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the indicated psychiatric diagnosis. Separate models were fit by region and for patients who ever received assisted outpatient treatment (AOT), voluntary enhanced services but never AOT, or neither treatment.

RESULTS

In all three regions, for all three groups, the predicted probability of an MPR ≥ 80% improved over time (AOT improved by 31-40 percentage points, followed by enhanced services, which improved by 15-22 points, and "neither treatment," improving 8-19 points). Some regional differences in MPR trajectories were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

After New York implemented AOT and increased community resources for enhanced services, guideline-recommended medication possession improved among Medicaid enrollees with severe mental illness--even among those who never received these interventions or services. However, further study is needed to understand why there were different regional trajectories and why some groups did not gain similarly across regions.

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.

Community treatment orders in Toronto: the emerging data

OBJECTIVE

Over a 4-year period in Toronto, this study aimed to compare individuals on a community treatment order (CTO) with individuals not on a CTO in terms of sociodemographic and clinical variables, hospital use, and continued engagement with health services on exit from the case management program. Hospital stay reductions from preadmission into the program to various postadmission periods were compared across the 2 groups.

METHODS

Descriptive statistics and tests of statistical significance (chi-square and t test) were run on regularly collected administrative data for both groups.

RESULTS

Categorical data analysis indicated the 2 groups were statistically similar on a range of sociodemographic and clinical variables. Although both groups displayed reductions in hospital use, the CTO group displayed a significantly higher reduction in cumulative days in hospital per hospital admission within both the first and second 6-month period postadmission. This same group also had significantly greater reduction in hospital admissions during the second 6-month period postadmission. The CTO group also had a significantly higher portion of individuals exiting the program within these first two 6-month periods; as well, they were less likely to exit with support such as case management or assertive community treatment and more likely to continue with ongoing medical supervision than the comparison group.

CONCLUSION

Although we were unable to rule out regression to the mean for hospitalization reductions, the Toronto experience has shown that CTOs are helpful in assisting individuals who historically refused services to remain engaged with treatment and support services. The study also calls for broadening operational measures of outcomes for CTO studies.

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.

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.

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.

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 to 2003 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 to indicate that compulsory community treatment was effective in any of the main outcome indices: health service use (2 RCTs, n=416, RR readmission to hospital by 11-12 months 0.98 CI 0.79 to 1.2), social functioning (2 RCTs, n=416, RR outcome '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 homelessness 0.67 CI 0.39 to 1.15) or satisfaction with care (2 RCTs, n=416, RR 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, NNT 6 CI 6 to 6.5). In terms of numbers needed to treat, it would take 85 OPC orders to prevent one readmission, 27 to prevent one episode of homelessness and 238 to prevent one arrest.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on current evidence, community treatment orders may not be an effective alternative to standard care. It appears that compulsory community treatment results in no significant difference in service use, social functioning or quality of life compared with standard care. There is currently no evidence of cost effectiveness. People receiving compulsory community treatment were, however, less likely to be victim of violent or non-violent crime. It is, nevertheless, difficult to conceive of another group in society that would be subject to measures that curtail the freedom of 85 people to avoid one admission to hospital or of 238 to avoid one arrest. We urgently require further, good quality randomised controlled studies to consolidate findings and establish whether it is the intensity of treatment in compulsory community treatment or its compulsory nature that affects outcome. Evaluation of a wide range of outcomes should be included if this type of legislation is introduced.

Perceived coercion at admission to psychiatric hospital and engagement with follow-up--a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Measures of perceived coercion at psychiatric hospital admission have been developed. We aimed to investigate predictors of perceived coercion in subjects admitted to psychiatric hospital in the UK, and to test the hypothesis that high perceived coercion at admission predicts poor engagement with community follow-up.

METHOD

A cohort of consecutively admitted subjects were interviewed at admission and before discharge, and were followed prospectively for 10 months. Service use and compliance with care were rated from case notes and by clinicians.

RESULTS

One hundred interviews were obtained from 118 consecutive admissions (85%). Compulsory admission was strongly associated with perceived coercion, but one-third of voluntary patients felt highly coerced, and two-thirds were not certain they were free to leave hospital. Greater age, less insight, and non-white ethnicity were associated with high perceived coercion. Perceived coercion did not predict engagement with follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Services recognise provision of care in the least restrictive setting as a key objective. Perceived coercion should be regarded as an important outcome measure in service evaluation.

Admission intervention team: medical center based intensive case management of the seriously mentally ill

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect a medical center based intensive case management team had on utilization of inpatient psychiatric treatment. A frequent user of inpatient psychiatric hospitalization was defined as any patient who had 3 or more admissions during the 12 months prior to referral to the program. A within-subjects design was used comparing rates of hospital admissions and hospital days before and after program enrollment for 185 patients in the program for 1 year, and for 50 of those patients in the program for 7 years. Cost savings across program years 1992 through 2000 were calculated using inpatient per diem rates. The number of admissions, length of stay, and cost of care were significantly reduced during the study period. The results of this study clearly demonstrate that a medical center based intensive case management team can significantly reduce admissions, length of stay, and the cost of care of frequent users of hospital inpatient services. Development of a true multidisciplinary team, enhancement of medication and treatment compliance, and a team case management model were the factors suggested as contributing to the success of this treatment program.

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.

Involuntary outpatient commitment, community treatment orders, and assisted outpatient treatment: what's in the data?

OBJECTIVE

Involuntary outpatient commitment (OPC), also referred to as community treatment orders or assisted outpatient treatment, is a legal intervention intended to improve treatment adherence among persons with serious mental illness. This paper reviews the empirical literature on the procedure's effectiveness.

METHODS

We identified and reviewed all English-language studies of OPC and related procedures available in Medline and other bibliographic search services.

RESULTS

Existing naturalistic and quasi-experimental studies, taken as a whole, moderately support the view that the procedure is effective, although all do have methodological limitations. Two randomized controlled studies of OPC have conflicting findings and are reviewed in detail.

CONCLUSIONS

On balance, empirical studies support the view that OPC is effective under certain conditions, although some of the evidence has been contested and the policy remains controversial.

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.

Involuntary outpatient commitment

This article offers a novel approach to outpatient commitment (OPC). After distinguishing 4 varieties of OPC, the article shows how 3 are easy to justify, whereas "preventive outpatient commitment" (POC) requires more careful scrutiny. The article argues that, as a general matter, POC is not justified, except for on a "one free shot" basis. The hope is that patients will come to appreciate the benefits of treatment in the community and will become voluntarily compliant; after one free shot, they are in a much better position to decide. The consequences of noncompliance are also explored.

Assessing the outcome of compulsory psychiatric treatment in the community: epidemiological study in Western Australia

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether community treatment orders for psychiatric patients reduce subsequent use of health services in comparison with control patients not placed on an order.

DESIGN

Epidemiological study with a before and after, two stage design of matching and multivariate analysis, controlling for sociodemographic variables, clinical features, and psychiatric history.

SETTING

All community based and inpatient psychiatric services in Western Australia, covering a population of 1.7 million people.

PARTICIPANTS

228 subjects placed on a community treatment order, matched with an equal number of controls to give a total of 456 patients.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Inpatient admissions, bed days, and outpatient contacts one year after subjects were placed on a community treatment order or the index date of matched controls.

RESULTS

Both subjects and their matched controls had reduced inpatient admissions and bed days in hospital. Subjects had significantly more outpatient contacts. Multivariate analysis indicated that being placed on a community treatment order was associated with increased outpatient contacts in the subsequent year compared with the control group. Otherwise, orders did not affect subsequent use of health services. Other factors associated with increased use of health services were age and inpatient admissions, bed days, and outpatient contacts before the order or index date. No covariates were shown to be associated with changes in within pair differences in inpatient admissions or bed days.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of compulsory treatment in the community does not lead to reduced use of health services.

Community treatment orders: ethical practice in an era of magical thinking

With the passage of legislation in June 2000, coercive measures in the form of community treatment orders (CTOs) have become part of the community mental health landscape in Ontario. Given that community practitioners place a high value upon their ability to create voluntary and egalitarian partnerships with clients, the question of whether ethical practice is possible under conditions of legislated coercion is relevant. Based upon a review of the pro and con arguments that preceded CTO legislation, followed by an examination of available research on effectiveness, this paper suggests that forms of magical thinking have been at work on both sides of the CTO debate. A broader definition of coercion is proposed--one that envelopes both overt and covert forms. Finally, the author offers an approach to ethical practice which is based on the use of transformative power rather than coercive power, and which includes a 3-step strategy (using liberation tactics, proactive contracting, and procedural justice).

Legal pitfalls of psychiatric research

BACKGROUND

The increasing complexity of psychiatric research, including recent attempts to evaluate mental health legislation, suggests legal advice may be valuable in a wide range of research contexts.

AIMS

We aim to illustrate both the legal pitfalls of research in psychiatry and the potential for solutions if the methods are carefully chosen.

METHOD

Two examples of research are subject to legal analysis, one involving advance directives, the other the random discharge of compulsory out-patients.

RESULTS

This analysis illustrates that participation in research may expose clinicians to additional forms of liability, but the legal risks can be minimised through changes in the methods or additional safeguards.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaboration between academic law and psychiatry can enrich research agendas and avoid serious legal pitfalls. We argue that sound legal advice should be sought at the planning stage of research in psychiatry, but the fear of liability should not lead to overly defensive research practices. The aim should be to strike the right balance between avoiding unacceptable exposure to liability and stifling innovative research.

Community treatment orders: relationship to clinical care, medication compliance, behavioural disturbance and readmission

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the readmission rate, and the level of patient disturbance and community care associated with readmission following Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) in New South Wales, Australia.

METHOD

The readmission rates of all patients given CTOs within a 4-year period and a matched comparison group were investigated. The following factors were compared before, during and following a CTO: medication non-compliance, number of clinical services and duration of disturbed behaviour preceding hospitalisations.

RESULTS

Of 123 patients on CTOs (mean length, 288 days; SD, 210 days), 38 were readmitted during the CTO, the majority in the first 3 months and a further 21 patients were readmitted following termination of the CTO. Evidence of lower severity of illness in the comparison patients prevented meaningful evaluation of the readmission rates of the two groups. While on CTOs, patients receiving depot medications showed high compliance and a significantly reduced readmission rate compared with that of patients receiving oral medications. In the 2 months prior to hospitalisations during CTOs, compared with those before or after CTOs, patients received more frequent consultations and showed a shorter duration of medication non-compliance and disturbed behaviour. The level of services in the 3 months following discharge were comparable for patients on CTOs and the comparison group.

CONCLUSIONS

CTOs may reduce rehospitalisations by use of depot medication. Earlier and possibly more frequent readmissions in the CTO group shortened the disturbance associated with illness recurrence. It would appear that to establish a control group with equivalent severity of disorder necessary to evaluate the impact of CTOs requires a random allocation design.

Can involuntary outpatient commitment reduce hospital recidivism?: Findings from a randomized trial with severely mentally ill individuals

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of involuntary outpatient commitment in reducing rehospitalizations among individuals with severe mental illnesses.

METHOD

Subjects who were hospitalized involuntarily were randomly assigned to be released (N = 135) or to continue under outpatient commitment (N = 129) after hospital discharge and followed for 1 year. Each subject received case management services plus additional outpatient treatment. Outpatient treatment and hospital use data were collected.

RESULTS

In bivariate analyses, the control and outpatient commitment groups did not differ significantly in hospital outcomes. However, subjects who underwent sustained periods of outpatient commitment beyond that of the initial court order had approximately 57% fewer readmissions and 20 fewer hospital days than control subjects. Sustained outpatient commitment was shown to be particularly effective for individuals with nonaffective psychotic disorders, reducing hospital readmissions approximately 72% and requiring 28 fewer hospital days. In repeated measures multivariable analyses, the outpatient commitment group had significantly better hospital outcomes, even without considering the total length of court-ordered outpatient commitments. However, in subsequent repeated measures analyses examining the role of outpatient treatment among psychotically disordered individuals, it was also found that sustained outpatient commitment reduced hospital readmissions only when combined with a higher intensity of outpatient treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient commitment can work to reduce hospital readmissions and total hospital days when court orders are sustained and combined with intensive treatment, particularly for individuals with psychotic disorders. This use of outpatient commitment is not a substitute for intensive treatment; it requires a substantial commitment of treatment resources to be effective.

Coerced treatment in the community

Psychiatric patients have always been subjected to coerced treatment or management in the community. In the 1970s, civil rights litigation established formalized procedures for such coercion. This article discusses the types of procedures established and their effectiveness as well as their flaws. Suggestions are made to improve the efficacy of existing procedures.

The community treatment order: clinical and ethical issues

OBJECTIVE

In the light of recent legislation, this paper reviews the implementation of the Community Treatment Order (CTO) in terms of clinical efficacy and ethical issues involved in its use. The debate surrounding the introduction of CTOs in other countries is explored.

METHOD

A Medline search was conducted and references of recent articles followed up, with attention to Australian, New Zealand and international trends. A review of relevant legislation and government reports was conducted.

RESULTS

There has been limited debate in the Australian and New Zealand literature concerning the operation of CTOs. Despite their increasing and widespread use, there is a paucity of research on the efficacy of CTOs. Concerns about their negative effects on civil liberties have been stressed in the United Kingdom and American literature.

CONCLUSIONS

If the continued use of CTO is to be justified, both clinically and from the civil liberties perspective, controlled research needs to be carried out to identify whether CTOs are more effective than comprehensive assertive community outreach programs in reducing relapse rates and hospitalisation, and increasing compliance. Clinical guidelines concerning who is most likely to respond to such orders need to be developed. Alternatives to the CTO are explored, and future directions in research are outlined.

Violence and severe mental illness: the effects of substance abuse and nonadherence to medication

OBJECTIVE

Violent behavior among individuals with severe mental illness has become an important focus in community-based care. This study examines the joint effect of substance abuse and medication noncompliance on the greater risk of serious violence among persons with severe mental illness.

METHOD

Involuntarily admitted inpatients with severe mental illness who were awaiting a period of outpatient commitment were enrolled in a longitudinal outcome study. At baseline, 331 subjects underwent an extensive face-to-face interview. Complementary data were gathered by a review of hospital records and a telephone interview with a family member or other informant. These data included subjects' sociodemographic characteristics, illness history, clinical status, medication adherence, substance abuse, insight into illness, and violent behavior during the 4 months that preceded hospitalization. Associations between serious violent acts and a range of individual characteristics and problems were analyzed by using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

The combination of medication noncompliance and alcohol or substance abuse problems was significantly associated with serious violent acts in the community, after sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were controlled.

CONCLUSIONS

Alcohol or other drug abuse problems combined with poor adherence to medication may signal a higher risk of violent behavior among persons with severe mental illness. Reduction of such risk may require carefully targeted community interventions, including integrated mental health and substance abuse treatment.

Mandatory treatment from the family's perspective

Families' difficulties in getting treatment for highly disruptive, assaultive, or suicidal family members are compounded by patients' resistance, their resentment if relative seek forced interventions, and systemic and legal barriers to timely care. Consumer services and outreach may be a route to voluntary treatment.

What happens when effective outpatient civil commitment is terminated?

Outpatient civil commitment can be effective in slowing the revolving door for selected patients, but it may not be the best mechanism for ensuring treatment over time.

Conceptualizing services research on outpatient commitment

Issues affecting the research of outcomes of involuntary outpatient commitment (OC) of persons with serious mental illness are explored. These issues include the reliance on hospital recidivism as a primary measure of outcome, the role of family members and coercion in the process of outpatient commitment, and the conceptualization and design of studies. A conceptual framework that attempts to incorporate responses to these issues is proposed. Continued research on OC should build on conceptual models that include family role and burden, services delivered, an accounting for varied coercive mechanisms, and client-level outcomes. Rehospitalization should be conceptualized as an intermediate variable between OC and client-level outcomes rather than as an ultimate outcome.

The ethical challenges of a randomized controlled trial of involuntary outpatient commitment

Involuntary outpatient commitment (OPC) is a civil justice procedure intended to enhance compliance with community mental health treatment, to improve functioning, and to reduce recurrent dangerousness and hospital recidivism. The research literature on OPC indicates that it appears to improve outcomes in rates of rehospitalization and length of stay. However, all studies to date have serious methodological limitations because of selection bias; lack of specification of target populations; unclear operationalization of OPC; unmeasured variability in type, frequency, and intensity of treatment; as well as other confounding factors. To address limitations in these studies, the authors designed a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of OPC, combined with community-based case management, which is now under way in North Carolina. This article describes ethical dilemmas in designing and implementing an RCT of a legally coercive intervention in community-based settings. These ethical dilemmas challenge the experimental validity of an RCT but can be successfully addressed with careful planning and negotiation.