The Rights of Elders in Ireland during COVID-19.

This article reflects on COVID-19 restrictions imposed on elders in Ireland through the lens of the right to private and family life (Article 8 ECHR), focusing on stay at home orders and recommendations advising elders to avoid social contact. Furthermore, we examine restrictions on visiting nursing homes given the high death toll in that setting. In our analysis, we zero in on the principles of foreseeability and proportionality, highlighting areas of concern and aspects that we submit should be considered in a proportionality assessment. Ultimately, we argue that it is a mistake to view the COVID-19 pandemic solely as an emergency. In this manner, the solutions suggested through the law - restrictions on movement and visitation bans - are too narrow and fail to address the underlying structures, such as, issues in the healthcare system, the limited home help for elderly and poor conditions in nursing homes.

Isolating residents including wandering residents in care and group homes: Medical ethics and English law in the context of Covid-19.

This article investigates the lawfulness of isolating residents of care and group homes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many residents are mobile, and their freedom to move is a central ethical tenet and human right. It is not however an absolute right and trade-offs between autonomy, liberty and health need to be made since COVID-19 is highly infectious and poses serious risks of critical illness and death. People living in care and group homes may be particularly vulnerable because recommended hygiene practices are difficult for them and many residents are elderly, and/or have co-morbidities. In some circumstances, the trade-offs can be made easily with the agreement of the resident and for short periods of time. However challenging cases arise, in particular for residents and occupants with dementia who 'wander', meaning they have a strong need to walk, sometimes due to agitation, as may also be the case for some people with developmental disability (e.g. autism), or as a consequence of mental illness. This article addresses three central questions: (1) in what circumstances is it lawful to isolate residents of social care homes to prevent transmission of COVID-19, in particular where the resident has a strong compulsion to walk and will not, or cannot, remain still and isolated? (2) what types of strategies are lawful to curtail walking and achieve isolation and social distancing? (3) is law reform required to ensure any action to restrict freedoms is lawful and not excessive? These questions emerged during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and are still relevant. Although focussed on COVID-19, the results are also relevant to other future outbreaks of infectious diseases in care and group homes. Likewise, while we concentrate on the law in England and Wales, the analysis and implications have international significance.

Utilization of the Public Health Ordinance to prevent nosocomial spread in a case of acute measles-associated psychosis.

Measles is a highly contagious disease. A 24 years old patient, recently exposed to measles (unvaccinated), presented in the emergency department with severe agitation, compatible with an acute psychotic episode, during the measles epidemic which spread in Israel in 2018-2019. Upon hospital admission, strict isolation was instructed, yet, without compliance, probably due to the patient's status. Measles diagnosis was promptly confirmed. As measles transmission was eminent, public health measures were employed through immediate implementation of the section 15 of the Public Health Ordinance, allowing for compulsory short-term isolation. The patient's condition improved within a few days and the measures were no longer necessary. This measles case occurred in the pre-Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic when use of a Public Health Ordinance was considered an extreme measure. This is in contrast to the current global use of Public Health laws to enforce strict quarantine and isolation on persons infected or potentially exposed to COVID-19. Nevertheless, minimizing infectious diseases transmission is a core function of public health law. Utilizing legal enforcement in circumstances of immediate public health hazard, such as nosocomial measles transmission, necessitates careful consideration. The integrative clinical and public health approach and prompt measures employed in this exceptional case, led to prevention of further infection spread.

An integrated view on society readiness and initial reaction to COVID-19: A study across European countries.

With the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the question of society's capability to deal with an acute health crisis is, once again, brought to the forefront. In the core is the need to broaden the perspective on the determinants of a country's ability to cope with the spread of the virus. This paper is about bringing together diverse aspects of readiness and initial reaction to a COVID-19 outbreak. We proposed an integrated evaluation framework which encapsulates six dimensions of readiness and initial reaction. Using a specific multi-level outranking method, we analysed how these dimensions affect the relative positioning of European countries in the early stages of the COVID-19 outbreak. The results revealed that the order of countries based on our six-dimensional assessment framework is significantly reminiscent of the actual positioning of countries in terms of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality in the initial phase of the pandemic. Our findings confirm that only when a country's readiness is complemented by an appropriate societal reaction we can expect a less severe outcome. Moreover, our study revealed different patterns of performance between former communist Eastern European and Western European countries.

Clustering and superspreading potential of SARS-CoV-2 infections in Hong Kong.

Superspreading events (SSEs) have characterized previous epidemics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infections1-6. For SARS-CoV-2, the degree to which SSEs are involved in transmission remains unclear, but there is growing evidence that SSEs might be a typical feature of COVID-197,8. Using contact tracing data from 1,038 SARS-CoV-2 cases confirmed between 23 January and 28 April 2020 in Hong Kong, we identified and characterized all local clusters of infection. We identified 4-7 SSEs across 51 clusters (n = 309 cases) and estimated that 19% (95% confidence interval, 15-24%) of cases seeded 80% of all local transmission. Transmission in social settings was associated with more secondary cases than households when controlling for age (P = 0.002). Decreasing the delay between symptom onset and case confirmation did not result in fewer secondary cases (P = 0.98), although the odds that an individual being quarantined as a contact interrupted transmission was 14.4 (95% CI, 1.9-107.2). Public health authorities should focus on rapidly tracing and quarantining contacts, along with implementing restrictions targeting social settings to reduce the risk of SSEs and suppress SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

COVID-19: Mandatory institutional isolation v. voluntary home self-isolation.

Since community transmission of COVID-19 became established in South Africa, individuals who test positive for COVID-19 and who do not require hospitalisation have been permitted to self-isolate in their homes to reduce the burden on the health system. The Premier of KwaZulu-Natal Province has since announced that self-isolation will no longer be permitted in the province. Instead, mandatory isolation in state-designated isolation sites would apply. This policy change marks a dangerous departure from the country's prevailing position on home-based self-isolation and should not be replicated elsewhere.

Isolation and quarantine in South Africa during COVID-19: Draconian measures or proportional response?

In the midst of an unprecedented public health crisis, extraordinary containment measures must be implemented. These include both isolation and quarantine, either on a voluntary basis or enforced. In the transition from voluntary to mandatory isolation, conflicts arise at the intersection of ethics, human rights and the law. The Siracusa Principles adopted by the United Nations Economic and Social Council in 1985 and enshrined in international human rights legislation and guidelines specify conditions under which civil liberties may be infringed. In order for isolation processes in South Africa to claim legitimacy, it is important that these principles as well as national laws and constitutional rights are embedded in state action.

Isolation of patients in psychiatric hospitals in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: An ethical, legal, and practical challenge.

Psychiatric inpatients are particularly vulnerable to the transmission and effects of COVID-19. As such, healthcare providers should implement measures to prevent its spread within mental health units, including adequate testing, cohorting, and in some cases, the isolation of patients. Respiratory isolation imposes a significant limitation on an individual's right to liberty, and should be accompanied by appropriate legal safeguards. This paper explores the implications of respiratory isolation in English law, considering the applicability of the common law doctrine of necessity, the Mental Capacity Act 2005, the Mental Health Act 1983, and public health legislation. We then interrogate the practicality of currently available approaches by applying them to a series of hypothetical cases. There are currently no 'neat' or practicable solutions to the problem of lawfully isolating patients on mental health units, and we discuss the myriad issues with both mental health and public health law approaches to the problem. We conclude by making some suggestions to policymakers.

[Involuntary detention and seclusion measures in psychiatry: Where are we now? A regional Centre-Val de Loire 2012-2017 study]. / Soins sans consentement et mesures d'isolement en psychiatrie adulte : où en est-on ? L'exemple de la région Centre-Val de Loire via le Programme de médicalisation des systèmes d'information 2012­2017.

BACKGROUND: The French legal framework in psychiatry for involuntary detention (ID) and seclusion measures was modified in 2011 and 2016, respectively. This study aimed to describe the evolution of ID and seclusion measures in the Centre-Val de Loire region (CVL France) between 2012 and 2017, using the psychiatric hospital discharge database. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted, including adult patients (≥ 18 years old) from CVL hospitalized in psychiatry or included in a care program (outpatient care) between 2012 and 2017. Hospital stays for each patient were identified by an anonymized number. RESULTS: In 2017 in CVL, 13,942 patients were hospitalised for psychiatric reasons, with 2378 in ID (17%), a proportion that has remained stable since 2012. Among them, 3% were in care due to imminent danger (+ 54% since 2013, stabilisation since 2016), and 11% were hospitalized following a third party request (-13%). However, regarding location results varied from one department to the next. Seclusion measures involved 10% of full-time patients (stable), 27% of ID patients and 3% of those under voluntary care (stable). One quarter of the secluded patients were in voluntary care. Mean seclusion duration was 12 days, consecutive or not, and somewhat less for patients in voluntary care alone (10 days). CONCLUSION: The region wide ID rate and average duration of seclusion were lower than the nationwide rate (24% in full-time ID in 2015; 15 days of seclusion/patient), whereas the number of imminent danger procedures increased, as did the persistence of seclusion measures for patients in voluntary care (recommended only as a last resort and/or for ID patients). These results should lead to renewed assessment of care center practices. The French psychiatric hospital discharge database has several limitations, including lack of financial incentive and highly complex structuration. However, since 2018 new data regarding seclusion and restraint measures have been added to the existing registry, and they should facilitate more accurate analyses, particularly as concerns restraint.

[What replaces the locked door? : Conceptual and ethical considerations regarding open door policies, formal coercion and treatment pressures]. / Wodurch wird die geschlossene Tür ersetzt? : Konzeptionelle und ethische Überlegungen zu offenen Unterbringungsformen, formellem Zwang und psychologischem Druck.

BACKGROUND: Mental health professionals use various strategies to prevent involuntarily committed persons from absconding under an open door policy. OBJECTIVE: To provide an ethical framework for the evaluation of the replacement of locked ward doors by formal coercion or treatment pressures. METHODS: Empirically informed conceptual and ethical analysis. RESULTS: The replacement of locked ward doors by formal coercive measures applied to individual persons, such as mechanical restraint or seclusion, is ethically problematic. The use of treatment pressures, for example in the context of intensified observational measures, requires a differentiated ethical evaluation and does not necessarily constitute the milder means in comparison to locked ward doors. CONCLUSION: Unexplored conceptual, empirical and ethical issues surrounding open door policies and treatment pressures should be clarified by means of psychiatric and ethical research. In clinical practice, the choice of the least burdensome and least restrictive measures for involuntarily committed persons should be facilitated by appropriate ethical support services.

Transportation capacity for patients with highly infectious diseases in Europe: a survey in 16 nations.

Highly infectious diseases (HIDs) are defined as being transmissible from person to person, causing life-threatening illnesses and presenting a serious public health hazard. In most European Union member states specialized isolation facilities are responsible for the management of such cases. Ground ambulances are often affiliated with those facilities because rapid relocation of patients is most desirable. To date, no pooled data on the accessibility, technical specifications and operational procedures for such transport capacities are available. During 2009, the 'European Network for HIDs' conducted a cross-sectional analysis of hospitals responsible for HID patients in Europe including an assessment of (a) legal aspects; (b) technical and infrastructure aspects; and (c) operational procedures for ground ambulances used for HID transport. Overall, 48 isolation facilities in 16 European countries were evaluated and feedback rates ranged from 78% to 100% (n = 37 to n = 48 centres). Only 46.8% (22/47) of all centres have both national and local guidelines regulating HID patient transport. If recommended, specific equipment is found in 90% of centres (9/10), but standard ambulances in only 6/13 centres (46%). Exclusive entrances (32/45; 71%) and pathways (30/44; 68.2%) for patient admission, as well as protocols for disinfection of ambulances (34/47; 72.3%) and equipment (30/43; 69.8%) exist in most centres. In conclusion, the availability and technical specifications of ambulances broadly differ, reflecting different preparedness levels within the European Union. Hence, regulations for technical specifications and operational procedures should be harmonized to promote patient and healthcare worker safety.

[Within the limits of the law? Compulsory isolation and compulsory treatment for tuberculosis]. / Binnen de grenzen van de wet?

We discuss two patients with infectious tuberculosis who underwent compulsory isolation and treatment without their consent. We describe the threat to the patient's rights, i.e. the right of freedom, the right of autonomy and the right of protection of the integrity of the body. We describe the application of the relevant laws and of the differing safeguards, and discuss the unlimited length of the Dutch Public Health Act orders. We refer to a Dutch statement and the WHO ethics guidelines on the implementation of their End TB Strategy. Forced isolation may be the last resort to protect society from patients with infectious diseases who do not comply with isolation measures, but compulsory treatment for tuberculosis patients is considered unacceptable. We suggest an amendment of the Dutch Public Health Act to enable better protection of the rights of tuberculosis patients.

[Preventing violence during hospitalisations in psychiatry]. / Prévenir les moments de violence lors des hospitalisations en psychiatrie.

Over recent years, the psychiatric sector has endeavoured to develop community-based care. Paradoxically, the number of compulsory hospitalisations is increasing. At the same time, the legal framework is evolving and measures relating to the deprivation of liberty in the context of psychiatric care have given rise to extensive guidelines. The work of the French National Health Authority represents, in this context, a certain continuity, with regard to the legal, ethical and social discussions around restriction of liberty practices within psychiatric units. The main focus is on the prevention and management of violent outbursts.

[The latest best practice guidelines relating to seclusion and restraint]. / Les dernières recommandations de bonnes pratiques sur l'isolement et la contention.

Several measures relating to seclusion and restraint are included in the French public health code. The best practice guidelines of the French National Health Authority, published in 2017, define these two notions and advise on the behaviour to adopt with regard to their implementation and monitoring. Likewise, informing and supporting the patient when these measures are lifted are critical moments which the teams must also be able to manage correctly.

De-escalation techniques used, and reasons for seclusion and restraint, in a forensic psychiatric hospital.

In Finland, the Mental Health Act determines the legal basis for seclusion and restraint. Restrictive measures are implemented to manage challenging situations and should be used as a last resort in psychiatric inpatient care. In the present study, we examined the reasons for seclusion and restraint, as well as whether any de-escalation techniques were used to help patients calm down. Seclusion and restraint files from a 4-year period (1 June 2009-31 May 2013) were retrospectively investigated and analysed by content analysis. Descriptive statistics were calculated. A total of 144 episodes of seclusion and restraint were included to analyse the reasons for seclusion and restraint, and 113 episodes were analysed to examine unsuccessful de-escalation techniques. The most commonly-used techniques were one-to-one interaction with a patient (n = 74, 65.5% of n = 113) and administration of extra medication (n = 37, 32.7% of n = 113). The reasons for seclusion and restraint were threatening harmful behaviour (n = 51, 35.4% of n = 144), direct harmful behaviour (n = 43, 29.9%), indirect harmful behaviour (n = 42, 29.1%), and other behaviours (n = 8, 5.6%). In general, the same de-escalation techniques were used with most patients. Most episodes of seclusion or restraint were due to threats of violence or direct violence. Individual means of self-regulation and patient guidance on these techniques are needed. Additionally, staff should be educated on a diverse range of de-escalation techniques. Future studies should focus on examining de-escalation techniques for the prevention of seclusion.