Area-level factors associated with variation in involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation across England: a cross-sectional, ecological study.

PURPOSE: Involuntary hospitalisations for mental health care are rising in many high income countries, including England. Looking at variation between areas can help us understand why rates are rising and how this might be reversed. This cross-sectional, ecological study aimed to better understand variation in involuntary hospitalisations across England. METHOD: The unit of analysis was Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs), NHS bodies responsible for delivering healthcare to local areas in England. 205 CCGs were included in the analysis. Demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic variables at CCG-level were extracted from national, open access data bases. The outcome variable was the rate of involuntary hospitalisation for psychiatric care under the 1983 Mental Health Act in 2021/22. RESULTS: There was a four-fold difference between the CCGs with the highest and lowest involuntary hospitalisations. In an adjusted analysis, CCGs with a higher percentage of severe mental illness in the population, higher percentage of male population, and higher community and outpatient mental health care use showed a higher rate of involuntary hospitalisation. Depression, urbanicity, deprivation, ethnicity, and age were not strongly associated with involuntary hospitalisation after adjustment. These variables explained 10.68% of the variation in involuntary hospitalisations across CCGs. CONCLUSION: Some demographic and clinical variables explained variation in involuntary hospitalisation between areas in England, however, most of the variance was unexplained. Complex relationships between urbanicity, deprivation, age, and ethnicity need to be further explored. The role of other influences, such as variation in service organisation or clinical practice, also need to be better understood.

Longitudinal investigation of patients receiving involuntary treatment for extremely severe anorexia nervosa.

INTRODUCTION: Involuntary treatment may be a life-saving option for extremely severe anorexia nervosa (AN) in the context of life-threatening conditions and refusal of care. The long-term outcomes of patients undergoing involuntary treatment for AN are poorly understood. This study aims to explore quality of life, long-term outcomes and attitudes towards involuntary treatment in patients involuntarily treated for extremely severe AN. METHODS: 23 patients involuntarily admitted for extremely severe AN (I-AN), and 25 voluntarily admitted patients (V-AN) were compared for body mass index (BMI), residual symptoms, quality of life, and attitudes towards treatment almost four years after discharge. In I-AN, clinical variables were also compared between admission and follow-up. RESULTS: At follow-up, weight restoration was higher in V-AN (p = 0.01), while differences in quality of life, BMI, and mortality rates were not significant between I-AN and V-AN (p > 0.05). In I-AN, BMI increased and weight-controlling strategies decreased at follow-up (p < 0.05). Despite negative experiences of involuntary treatment, the perception of the necessity of treatment increased from admission to follow-up (p < 0.01) and became comparable to V-AN (p > 0.05). DISCUSSION: Involuntary treatment for AN does not appear to be a barrier to weight gain and clinical improvement, nor to long-term attitudes towards treatment.

Patient clinical and demographic factors associated with involuntary psychiatric admission in the northern territory top end.

OBJECTIVE: Australia has inadequate publicly available data regarding the use of involuntary psychiatric care. This study examined the association between patient clinical/demographic factors and involuntary psychiatric admission following initial psychiatric assessment in Royal Darwin Hospital. METHOD: Retrospective review of 638 psychiatric assessments followed by covariate analysis of patient variables associated with involuntary psychiatric admission. RESULTS: Most of the 225 psychiatric admissions were involuntary (92%). Male patients and those with a preferred language other than English had the highest risk of being admitted involuntarily (RR 1.09, χ2 [1] = 3.9, p = .048, and RR 1.11, p = .036, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Further research regarding the influence of patient demographics and clinical factors on rates of involuntary admissions, particularly for Aboriginal patients, is recommended. The findings prompt discussion on strategies to improve monitoring of involuntary care and barriers to voluntary treatment.

Involuntary treatment in patients with anorexia nervosa: utilization patterns and associated factors.

BACKGROUND: A subgroup of patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) undergoing involuntary treatment (IT) seems to account for most of the IT events. Little is known about these patients and their treatment including the temporal distribution of IT events and factors associated with subsequent utilization of IT. Hence, this study explores (1) utilization patterns of IT events, and (2) factors associated with subsequent utilization of IT in patients with AN. METHODS: In this nationwide Danish register-based retrospective exploratory cohort study patients were identified from their first (index) hospital admission with an AN diagnosis and followed up for 5 years. We explored data on IT events including estimated yearly and total 5-year rates, and factors associated with subsequent increased IT rates and restraint, using regression analyses and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: IT utilization peaked in the initial few years starting at or following the index admission. A small percentage (1.0%) of patients accounted for 67% of all IT events. The most frequent measures reported were mechanical and physical restraint. Factors associated with subsequent increased IT utilization were female sex, lower age, previous admissions with psychiatric disorders before index admission, and IT related to those admissions. Factors associated with subsequent restraint were lower age, previous admissions with psychiatric disorders, and IT related to these. CONCLUSIONS: High IT utilization in a small percentage of individuals with AN is concerning and can lead to adverse treatment experiences. Exploring alternative approaches to treatment that reduce the need for IT is an important focus for future research.

Community Treatment Orders use Among Persons With a First Episode of Psychosis in Quebec.

OBJECTIVES: Specialized early intervention for psychosis can reduce the duration of untreated psychosis and improve clinical and functional outcomes. However, poor adherence to treatment is frequent. The literature on community treatment orders (CTOs) use in first-episode psychosis (FEP) as a means to improve treatment adherence is limited. In the context of early intervention for psychosis services (EIS), this study aims to describe (1) the frequency of CTOs utilisation, (2) the trend of CTOs use over time, (3) the timing and reasons for requesting CTOs and (4) the baseline characteristics of FEP patients on CTOs compared to those who were not. METHOD: A 5-year prospective longitudinal study describing the use of CTOs among persons with FEP admitted to two urban EIS in Montreal, Quebec, from 2005 to 2013. At admission, and then annually for 5 years, CTOs data were collected through chart review. Baseline characteristics, assessed by patient interviews, standardized questionnaires and chart review, included socio-demographic data, illness severity, functioning and alcohol and substance use. Descriptive analyses were performed, and FEP patients on CTOs during follow-up and those who were not were compared using analyses of variance, chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 567 FEP patients, 19.2% were placed on CTOs. The main reasons for requesting CTOs were to prevent further deterioration in mental state, social functioning, harmful behaviours to self and others and homelessness. FEP patients on CTOs had poorer premorbid and baseline functioning, more severe symptoms and social dysfunction at admission, including legal problems and homelessness. CONCLUSIONS: CTOs can be a tool to improve adherence to treatment, which is crucial for relapse prevention in FEP. However, since it is a coercive method that limits a person's fundamental rights, further research is warranted to assess its impact on patients' lives, clinical and functional outcomes, as well as patients' and carers' perception.

Professional caregivers' perceived barriers hindering the prevention and reduction of involuntary treatment among older persons receiving long-term care: A mixed methods study.

AIMS: To gain insights into the barriers towards the prevention and/or reduction of involuntary treatment in long-term geriatric care. DESIGN: Mixed methods. BACKGROUND: Measures to which a person resists and/or does not provide consent for are defined as involuntary treatment. The use of involuntary treatment violates the autonomy of (older) persons and causes more harm than benefit. Moreover, it contradicts the values of person-centred care. Nevertheless, its use among people living with dementia (PLWD) is still common practice. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, mixed methods study, including an online survey for professional caregivers and a semistructured focus group interview with professional caregivers. RESULTS: A total of 218 participants completed the questionnaire. The percentage of participants who perceived barriers in one of the 22 survey items ranged from 15% to 42%. Lack of time, the experienced need to use involuntary treatment, uncertainty about responsibilities of stakeholders and a lack of knowledge on methods to prevent and/or reduce the use of involuntary treatment were most seen as barriers. Nursing staff perceived a lack of time hindering them in the prevention or reduction of involuntary treatment more often than other professional caregivers. Working in home care and having no former experience with involuntary treatment usage increased perceived barriers. Participants of the focus group interview confirmed these findings and added that professional caregivers in general lack awareness on the concept of involuntary treatment. CONCLUSIONS: One out of four professional caregivers experiences barriers hindering prevention and/or reduction of involuntary treatment. More research is needed to gain a better understanding of how professional caregivers can be supported to remove barriers and, consequently, prevent and/or reduce the use of involuntary treatment. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Professional caregivers experience many barriers towards the prevention and reduction of involuntary treatment. Future initiatives should aim to remove the perceived barriers.

Increasing person-centeredness in psychosis inpatient care: care consumption before and after a person-centered care intervention.

BACKGROUND: Patients with psychotic disorders often need hospitalization with long stays. Person-centered care (PCC) has been shown to improve care quality and decrease the length of hospital stay in non-psychiatric settings. We carried out an educational intervention for inpatient staff, aiming to increase person-centeredness at a major Swedish psychosis clinic. The aim of this study was to test if the intervention could be associated with decreased length of hospital stay (LoS), involuntary stay (LoIS), and reduction in rapid readmissions. METHODS: Data from the clinic's administrative registry were compared for patients with a discharge diagnosis within the schizophrenia-spectrum treated during the one-year periods before and after the PCC intervention. RESULTS: Contrary to our hypotheses, a quantile regression estimated longer LoS post-intervention, median difference 10.4 d (CI 4.73-16.10). Neither age, sex nor diagnostic category were associated with LoS. Of all inpatient days, ∼80% were involuntary. While LoIS was numerically longer post-intervention, the difference did not reach significance in the final regression model (median difference 7.95 d, CI -1.40 to 17.31). Proportions with readmission within 2 weeks of discharge did not differ (7.7% vs 5.2%, n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: Increased length of inpatient care was observed after the PCPC intervention. This could reflect an increased focus on the unmet needs of persons with serious psychotic conditions, but it needs to be explored in future research using a more rigorous study design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is part of a larger evaluation of Person-Centered Psychosis Care (PCPC), registered during data collection (after the study start, before analysis) at clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT03182283.

Involuntary treatment: A qualitative study from the perspectives of individuals with anorexia nervosa.

OBJECTIVE: Involuntary treatment for anorexia nervosa (AN) is sometimes necessary and lifesaving but can be experienced negatively by some individuals. The purpose of this qualitative study was to better understand participants' perceptions about their experience with involuntary treatment for AN. METHOD: Thirty adult participants, who had been treated involuntarily for AN in the past, completed self-report measures and qualitative interviews. Interview transcripts were coded using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: (1) mixed perceptions about involuntary treatment, (2) the impact of involuntary treatment on external factors, including relationships, education, and employment, and (3) lessons learned from the experience. Participants who endorsed a positive shift in perspective regarding the need for involuntary treatment also reported favorable changes in their eating disorder recovery, whereas individuals whose perspective about their involuntary treatment remained negative, showed no changes in their recovery post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Involuntary treatment for AN was recognized, in retrospect, as being beneficial by individuals with AN who were doing well, but individuals who continued to struggle with their eating disorder reported negative consequences.

District nurses' experiences with involuntary treatment in dementia care at home: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Research shows that half of person(s) living with dementia (PLWD) receive care which they resist and/or have not given consent to, defined as involuntary treatment. District nurses play a key role in providing this care. Knowledge about how district nurses experience involuntary treatment is lacking. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe the experiences of district nurses who used involuntary treatment for PLWD at home. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive design using semi-structured interviews. Sixteen district nurses with experience in involuntary treatment for PLWD were recruited through purposive sampling. Data were analysed using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven. RESULTS: District nurses' experiences with involuntary treatment were influenced by their involvement in the decision-making process. When they were involved, they considered involuntary treatment use to be appropriate care. However, at the moment that involuntary treatment use was started, district nurses were worried that its use was unjust since they wished to respect the wishes of the PLWD. Eventually, district nurses found, from a professional perspective, that involuntary treatment use was necessary, and that safety outweighed the autonomy of the PLWD. District nurses experienced dealing with this dilemma as stressful, due to conflicting values. If district nurses were not involved in the decision-making process regarding the use of involuntary treatment, family caregivers generally decided on its use. Often, district nurses perceived this request as inappropriate dementia care and they first tried to create a dialogue with the family caregivers to reach a compromise. However, in most cases, family caregivers stood by their request and the district nurse still provided involuntary treatment and found this difficult to tolerate. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that district nurses experience involuntary treatment use as stressful due to dealing with obverse values of safety versus autonomy. To prevent involuntary treatment use and obverse values, we need to increase their ethical awareness, communication skills, knowledge and skills with person-centred care so they can deal with situations that can evolve into involuntary treatment use in a person-centred manner.

Caregivers' perceptions of compulsory treatment of physical illness in involuntarily psychiatric hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Physical morbidity is rife among patients with serious mental illness. When they are involuntarily hospitalized and even treated, they may still refuse treatment for physical illness leading clinicians to wonder about the ethics of coercing such treatments. RESEARCH AIM: This survey study explored psychiatric caregivers' perceptions on whether compulsory treatment of physical illness is legal and whether it is justifiable in patients with serious mental illness and under what circumstances. RESEARCH DESIGN: A questionnaire that included two case vignettes of an involuntarily hospitalized psychiatric patient with diabetes refusing treatment with insulin for various reasons. The cases differed in terms of diabetes severity. Participants answered questions regarding the appropriateness of involuntary treatment. PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT: Psychiatric medical doctors and nurses working in a mental health center. (N = 89, 50 female, ages 26-66). ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The study was approved by the Medical Centre Institutional Review Board (IRB) and the University Ethics Committee. The respondents' anonymity was kept. Participation was voluntary and consent was obtained. RESULTS: The severity of the patient's medical condition and their reason for refusing treatment were associated with participants' willingness to give insulin despite patient objection [(F(1, 87) = 49.41, p < .01; (F(1, 87) = 33.44, p < .01), respectively]. Participants were more inclined to support compulsory treatment if the patient's refusal was "illness-oriented" (i.e. directly related to psychiatric illness). Participants presented diverse views regarding the perceived legality of compulsory treatment of physical illness in such situations (illegal 63.09%; legal 23.8%; 13% unsure). The majority (53.5%-55.3%) of those who thought it was illegal supported compulsory treatment in high-severity, illness-oriented refusal situations. CONCLUSIONS: The severity of the medical condition and the reason for treatment refusal influence psychiatric caregivers' willingness to provide compulsory treatment for physical illness in involuntary hospitalized psychiatric patients. Beyond the legal framework, ethical guidelines for these situations are warranted, while decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis.