Validity of root cause analysis in investigating adverse events in psychiatry.

Root cause analysis (RCA), imported from high-reliability industries into health two decades ago, is the mandated methodology to investigate adverse events in most health systems. In this analysis, we argue that the validity of RCA in health and in psychiatry must be established, given the impact of these investigations on mental health policy and practice.

Limits of remote working: the ethical challenges in conducting Mental Health Act assessments during COVID-19.

COVID-19 has created additional challenges in mental health services, including the impact of social distancing measures on care and treatment. For situations where a detention under mental health legislation is required to keep an individual safe, psychiatrists may consider whether to conduct an assessment in person or using video technology. The Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 does not stipulate that an assessment has to be conducted in person. Yet, the Code of Practice envisions that detention assessments would be conducted face to face in all circumstances. During the pandemic, the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland, a statutory body with a duty to promote best practice of the Act, has been asked whether it may be acceptable and indeed preferable for some assessments to be conducted via video technology. Where an assessment is needed to determine if a patient needs to be detained, and where there is a need for social distancing or the need for 'shielding', remote assessments may in some circumstances be preferable. In this article, we outline the modification of the Mental Welfare Commission's previous outright rejection of virtual assessments as the pandemic progressed and discuss the ethical and legal issues the possibility of remote assessments has exposed. We also discuss the limits and when a virtual assessment is not considered ethical. As the pandemic moves from a state of emergency into a 'new normal' in psychiatric services during second, or subsequent, waves, the use and place (if any) of remote assessments for detention needs to be considered.

Montgomery and shared decision-making: implications for good psychiatric practice.

The 2015 Supreme Court judgment in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11 established that consent to medical treatment requires shared decision-making based on dialogue between the clinician and patient. In this editorial, we examine what Montgomery means for standards of good psychiatric practice, and argue that it represents an opportunity for delivering best practice in psychiatric care.Declaration of interestNone.

Advancing research in adult secure mental health services in England.

Forensic mental health services in high income countries are typically high cost and low volume, providing care to people with mental illness, personality disorders, learning disability and autism deemed to pose a risk to others. Research into how forensic mental health services work as a whole system is limited. Such research is urgently needed to guide policy makers and ensure that services operate effectively.