Why do patients want medication free treatment for psychosis? An explorative study on reasons for applying to medication free programs.

BACKGROUND: A focus on patient's and service user's perspectives regarding long-term antipsychotic treatment led to a declaration from the Norwegian Ministry of Health in 2015 to offer treatment without psychotropic medication in mental health as a voluntary option in all four health care regions. In the northernmost region, a 6-bed inpatient ward unit was established, uniquely designed to give people with severe mental illness the possibility to choose such treatment. Only voluntary admissions were accepted. The aim of the present study was to explore the motivation for applying for medication free treatment among patients with several years of treatment history due to psychosis. METHOD: We performed nineteen semi-structured, in-depth interviews with persons having at least one admission at the medication free treatment ward during the period 01.01.17 - 17.10.2021. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (NVivo). Systematic Text Condensation was applied, with analysis of data from the first interview. Exploration of connections, similarities and nuances was performed through axial coding with continuous comparison of data and memo writing, followed by focused coding identifying core concepts. RESULTS: All participants had a diagnosis of severe mental illness and a history of use of antipsychotics throughout many years. The motivation to apply for medication free treatment was complex. Negative experiences with medication were described, but also positive. Many had tried to taper off before, but described this as a lonely and difficult process. Five core concepts were formed and developed from the participants' narratives: 1) Medication experiences, 2) Developing illness, 3) Treatment in general, 4) Social life and 4) Growing up. CONCLUSION: The concept of medication free treatment represents a salutogenetic hope for change, closely linked to self-efficacy and an experience of mastery. Potential conflicts concerning guidelines or evidence on medication does not come forward as important. Support from family and professionals is crucial, in contrast to the feeling of being alone when hoping for change. Motivational factors are closely linked to the concept of recovery, where interaction happens on both an individual and a structural level.

Capacity-based legislation in Norway has so far scarcely influenced the daily life and responsibilities of patients' carers: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: When capacity-based mental health legislation was introduced in Norway in 2017, there was concern about the consequences of change in the law for patients'carer whose community treatment order was revoked as a result of being assessed as having capacity to consent. The concern was that the lack of a community treatment order would increase carers' responsibilities in an already challenging life situation. The aim of this study is to explore carers' experiences of how their responsibility and daily life were affected after the patient's community treatment order was revoked based on capacity to consent. METHOD: We conducted individual in-depth interviews from September 2019 to March 2020 with seven carers of patients whose community treatment order was revoked following assessment of capacity to consent, based on the change in the legislation. The transcripts were analysed with inspiration from reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The participants had little knowledge about the amended legislation, and three out of seven did not know about the change at the time of the interview. Their responsibility and daily life were as before, but they felt that the patient was more content, without relating this to the change in the law. They had found that coercion was necessary in certain situations, which made them worry whether the new legislation would make it more difficult to use coercion. CONCLUSION: The participating carers had little or no knowledge of the change in the law. They were involved in the patient's everyday life as before. The concerns prior to the change about a worse situation for carers had not affected them. On the contrary, they found that their family member was more satisfied with life and the care and treatment provided. This may suggest that the intention of the legislation to reduce coercion and increase autonomy was fulfilled for these patients, without resulting in any significant change in carers' lives and responsibilities.

Health professionals' experience of treatment of patients whose community treatment order was revoked under new capacity-based mental health legislation in Norway: qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Norway introduced capacity-based legislation in mental healthcare on 1 September 2017 with the aim of increasing patient autonomy and legal protection and reducing the use of coercion. The new legislation was expected to be particularly important for patients under community treatment orders (CTOs). AIMS: To explore health professionals' experiences of how capacity-based legislation affects healthcare services for patients whose compulsory treatment order was revoked as a result of being assessed as having capacity to consent. METHOD: Nine health professionals responsible for treatment and care of patients whose CTO was revoked owing to the new legislation were interviewed in depth from September 2019 to March 2020. We used a hermeneutic approach to the interviews and analysis of the transcripts. RESULTS: The participants found that capacity-based legislation raised their awareness of their responsibility for patient autonomy and involvement in treatment and care. They also felt a need for more frequent assessments of patients' condition and capacity to consent and more flexibility between levels of care. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that health professionals found that capacity-based legislation raised their awareness of their responsibility for patient autonomy and involvement in treatment and care. They sought closer dialogue with patients, providing information and advice, and more frequently assessing patients' condition to adjust treatment and care to enable them to retain their capacity to consent. This could be challenging and required competence, continuity and close collaboration between personnel in different healthcare services at primary and specialist level.

Increased autonomy with capacity-based mental health legislation in Norway: a qualitative study of patient experiences of having come off a community treatment order.

BACKGROUND: Capacity-based mental health legislation was introduced in Norway on 1 September 2017. The aim was to increase the autonomy of patients with severe mental illness and to bring mental health care in line with human rights.  The aim of this study is to explore patient experiences of how far the new legislation has enabled them to be involved in decisions on their treatment after they were assessed as capable of giving consent and had their community treatment order (CTO) revoked due to the change in the legislation. METHOD: Individual in-depth interviews were conducted from September 2019 to March 2020 with twelve people with experience as CTO patients. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis inspired by hermeneutics. RESULTS: Almost all interviewees were receiving the same health care over two years after their CTO was terminated. Following the new legislation, they found it easier to be involved in treatment decisions when off a CTO than they had done in periods without a CTO before the amendment. Being assessed as having capacity to consent had enhanced their autonomy, their dialogues and their feeling of being respected in encounters with health care personnel. However, several participants felt insecure in such encounters and some still felt passive and lacking in initiative due to their previous experiences of coercion. They were worried about becoming acutely ill and again being subjected to involuntary treatment. CONCLUSION: The introduction of capacity-based mental health legislation seems to have fulfilled the intention that treatment and care should, as far as possible, be provided in accordance with patients' wishes. Systematic assessment of capacity to consent seems to increase the focus on patients' condition, level of functioning and opinions in care and treatment. Stricter requirements for health care providers to find solutions in cooperation with patients seem to lead to new forms of collaboration between patients and health care personnel, where patients have become more active participants in their own treatment and receive help to make more informed choices.

Impact of introducing capacity-based mental health legislation on the use of community treatment orders in Norway: case registry study.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, a capacity-based criterion was added to the Norwegian Mental Health Act, stating that those with capacity to consent to treatment cannot be subjected to involuntary care unless there is risk to themselves or others. This was expected to reduce incidence and prevalence rates, and the duration of episodes of involuntary care, in particular regarding community treatment orders (CTOs). AIMS: The aim was to investigate whether the capacity-based criterion had the expected impact on the use of CTOs. METHOD: This retrospective case register study included two catchment areas serving 16% of the Norwegian population (aged ≥18). In total, 760 patients subject to 921 CTOs between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2019 were included to compare the use of CTOs 2 years before and 2 years after the legal reform. RESULTS: CTO incidence rates and duration did not change after the reform, whereas prevalence rates were significantly reduced. This was explained by a sharp increase in termination of CTOs in the year of the reform, after which it reduced and settled on a slightly higher leven than before the reform. We found an unexpected significant increase in the use of involuntary treatment orders for patients on CTOs after the reform. CONCLUSIONS: The expected impact on CTO use of introducing a capacity-based criterion in the Norwegian Mental Health Act was not confirmed by our study. Given the existing challenges related to defining and assessing decision-making capacity, studies examining the validity of capacity assessments and their impact on the use of coercion in clinical practice are urgently needed.

Out-patient commitment order use in Norway: incidence and prevalence rates, duration and use of mental health services from the Norwegian Outpatient Commitment Study.

BACKGROUND: Norway authorised out-patient commitment in 1961, but there is a lack of representative and complete data on the use of out-patient commitment orders. AIMS: To establish the incidence and prevalence rates on the use of out-patient commitment in Norway, and how these vary across service areas. Further, to study variations in out-patient commitment across service areas, and use of in-patient services before and after implementation of out-patient commitment orders. Finally, to identify determinants for the duration of out-patient commitment orders and time to readmission. METHOD: Retrospective case register study based on medical files of all patients with an out-patient commitment order in 2008-2012 in six catchment areas in Norway, covering one-third of the Norwegian population aged 18 years or more. For a subsample of patients, we recorded use of in-patient care 3 years before and after their first-ever out-patient commitment. RESULTS: Annual incidence varied between 20.7 and 28.4, and prevalence between 36.5 and 48.9, per 100 000 population aged 18 years or above. Rates differed significantly between catchment areas. Mean out-patient commitment duration was 727 days (s.d. = 889). Use of in-patient care decreased significantly in the 3 years after out-patient commitment compared with the 3 years before. Use of antipsychotic medication through the whole out-patient commitment period and fewer in-patient episodes in the 3 years before out-patient commitment predicted longer time to readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanisms behind the pronounced variations in use of out-patient commitment between sites call for further studies. Use of in-patient care was significantly reduced in the 3 years after a first-ever out-patient commitment order was made. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: None.

The use of outpatient commitment in Norway: Who are the patients and what does it involve?

PURPOSE: Despite one of the longest histories of using Outpatient Commitment (OC), little is known about the use in the Norwegian context. Reporting from the Norwegian Outpatient Commitment Study, this article aims to: establish the profile of the OC population in Norway; ascertain the legal justification for the use of OC and what OC involves for patients; investigate possible associations between selected patient and service characteristics and duration of OC, and; explore potential differences based on gender or rurality. METHODS: A retrospective multi-site study, extracting data from the medical records of all patients on OC in six large regional hospitals in 2008-12, with detailed investigation over 36 months of the subsample of patients on first ever OC-order in 2008-09. We use descriptive statistics to establish the profile of the OC population and the legal justification for and the content of OC, and logistic regression to examine factors associated with duration of OC over 36 months. RESULTS: 1414 patients were on OC over the 5 years, and 274 had their first OC in 2008-09. The sample included more men than woman, and three-quarters were diagnosed with schizophrenia. They had long service histories, including involuntary admissions. The legal justification for all OC-orders was the need for treatment, and 18% were additionally justified by dangerousness. The option to initiate OC directly from the community was not used in any of the 274 first ever OC-orders. While 98% of patients were prescribed psychotropic medication, under half had an Involuntary Treatment Order, which under the Norwegian OC regime is required in addition to the OC-order to oblige patients to accept treatment (usually medication). 60% of patients had ≥2 clinical contacts monthly. There were some gender differences in descriptive analyses with men generally being worse off, but no clear pattern in terms of rurality. Patients in the sample had been on OC between one week and 20 years. The median duration of OC over 36 months was 365 days. Three factors contributed to longer duration: the use of the dangerousness criterion; a diagnosis of schizophrenia disorder, and; considerable problems with substance abuse. CONCLUSION: The characteristics of the OC population in Norway are very similar to that reported in other jurisdictions. Medication seems to be the central focus of OC, yet additional Involuntary Treatment Orders are imposed for less than half of patients. While all OC-orders were justified by the need to ensure treatment, risk seems to be a concern for a subgroup of patients who are kept on for longer. How the 2017 amendment to the mental health act, which precludes compulsion for competent patients unless danger is present, will affect OC use, remains to be seen. Further studies should specifically focus on variation in the use of OC, including at the level of individual clinicians.

Community treatment orders - what are the views of decision makers?

BACKGROUND: Community treatment orders (CTOs) are being increasingly used in Western countries. The scheme implies that mental health patients can live outside a hospital, but still be subject to coercive care to ensure compliance with their treatment. There is limited knowledge of how the scheme is practised. AIMS: To gain knowledge of how decision makers weigh and evaluate various considerations when making decisions on CTOs. METHOD: Qualitative in-depth interviews with decision makers responsible for CTOs in Norway. RESULTS: Decision makers viewed CTOs as a useful scheme to ensure control, continuity and follow-up care in the treatment of outpatients with a history of poor treatment motivation. They had varied interest in and knowledge of the patient's life situation and how the scheme affects the patient's everyday life. Little attention was devoted to patient experiences of formal and informal coercion. CONCLUSION: When deciding on CTOs, decision makers should pay more attention to the negative consequences that patients may experience. In many cases, decision makers are probably not aware of these coercive factors.

Patients on outpatient commitment orders in Northern Norway.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, an increasing number of countries have introduced outpatient commitment orders (OC), which imply that patients can be subject to compulsory follow-up and treatment while living in the community. However, few studies on how OC is practised have been published. METHOD: Retrospective case register study based on medical files of all patients receiving an OC order in 2008-2012. We used a pre/post design, recording the use of inpatient services three years before and three years after for those patients who received their first ever OC order in 2008 and 2009. RESULTS: A total of 345 OC orders applying to 286 persons were identified in the study period 2008-2012. Incidence and prevalence rates were relatively stable, but decreased during the last years of the study period. For all the 54 patients receiving their first ever OC order in 2008 and 2009, need for treatment was the reason for imposing OC, and all received psychotropic medication. The number of inpatient admissions and inpatient days was greater, while the number of days for each admission was lower three years after the OC order than three years before. The first ever OC lasted under a year for 76% of the patients. Receiving depot medication and follow-up by psychiatrists predicted longer OC durations than such treatment and care by psychologists. Only nine patients were not hospitalized during the three-year follow-up after the first ever OC order. CONCLUSION: Patients on first ever OC orders in Northern Norway used inpatient services more after OC orders than before. Further studies are needed to explore whether increased use of inpatient services by OC patients is beneficial or a failure of OC.

'When coercion moves into your home'--a qualitative study of patient experiences with outpatient commitment in Norway.

The use of coercion on people with mental health problems is a serious intervention, and a reduction in its use is a declared goal in mental healthcare. Yet, many countries have introduced expanded powers of coercion in recent years, including outpatient commitment (OC). However, the evidence of the effectiveness of OC is inconclusive, and little is known about how patients experience OC schemes. The objective of this qualitative study was to explore (i) patients' experiences with OC, and (ii) how routines in care and health services affect patients' everyday living. The data were collected in 2011-2012 and included 11 qualitative in-depth interviews with patients subject to OC. The study used a narrative approach to interviews and a thematic narrative analysis. Participants generally complied with the OC requirements because of the clear and secure framework of OC, and also because they believed that the alternative would be involuntary hospitalisation. No one reported physical force, but coercion was experienced as limitation of freedom of action through excessive control and little patient influence or participation in their own treatment. Factors affecting patients' freedom of action under OC should be taken into account when the imposition of an OC order is considered.