Crime and victimization outcomes following civil rights limits to the use of compulsory treatment.

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been associated with reduced crime/victimization-risk. Australia's ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) enabled patient-rights-advocacy to limit CTO-assignment to persons lacking decision-making-capacity. This effort was accompanied by a 15% reduction in CTO-utilization. Has this change affected crime/victimization-involvements of patients with schizophrenia-diagnoses? In Victoria Australia, the study considers crime/victimization-involvement among three patient-groups recruited with the same sampling-algorithm in the decade before (2000-2009, N = 14,711) and after (2010-2019, N = 10,702) CRPD-ratification. Each group is its own-control. Each group's positive-outcome across decades would be "no increase" in crime/victimization-involvement or in the ratio of the group's incident-rates to the State's. Following CRPD-ratification, first-hospitalized-patients with at least one CTO-assignment doubled their involvement in major crime-perpetrations (from 13% to 27%), non-CTO-hospitalized-patients almost doubled (from 10% to 18%), and 11% of outpatients were involved when none were before. Overall, a third (34%) were victimized-by-major-crime up from 28%, with 25% of outpatients experiencing victimization when none had before. Increases were most evident in major-crimes, led by assaults/abductions. Capacity-constraints on compulsory-treatment are associated with increases in crime/victimization-involvement, a transfer of responsibility for patients with schizophrenia-diagnoses from the mental-health-system to the criminal-justice-system, validation of dangerousness stereotypes, and growing negative family impact.

Mortality-Risk With "Capacity" Constraints On Community Treatment Order Utilization.

Background: Assignment to a community treatment order (CTO) has been associated with reduced mortality risk. In Victoria Australia civil-rights enhancements involving capacity to refuse involuntary treatment have contributed to a 15% reduction between 2010 and 2019 in CTO assignments among first hospitalized patients with Schizophrenia diagnoses. Has this change impacted patient mortality risk? Study Design: This study considered mortality-risk between 2010 and 2019 for 3 patient groups with schizophrenia diagnoses: All 4848 hospitalized patients who were assigned to a CTO for the first time in the period; 3988 matched and randomly selected patients, who were first hospitalized in the decade, without CTO assignment; and 1675 never hospitalized or CTO-assigned outpatients. Deaths of Schizophrenic patients in each group were evaluated against expected deaths given standardized mortality ratios for Victoria. Logistic regression was used to evaluate mortality risk for each treatment group while taking account of race, demographics, differential access to initial diagnoses of life-threatening physical illness, mental health service resources, and indicators of social disadvantage. Study Results: A total of 78% of the 777 deaths of schizophrenia patients in all 3 groups were premature. The 2 hospitalized groups did not differ in mortality risk. Among Victoria's 2010-2019 outpatients (inclusive of treatment refusers with a recorded service contact), 16.2% had a Schizophrenia diagnosis-up from 0.2% in 2000-2009, the prior decade. Outpatients with Schizophrenia were at 48% greater risk of death than individuals in the hospitalized groups, taking all the afore mentioned risk factors into account. Conclusions: Reductions in CTO utilization associated with potential treatment refusals of involuntary community-treatment supervision, seem to have increased mortality risk for this vulnerable population. The line between civil-rights protection and abandonment has been blurred.

Need for Treatment, A Less Restrictive Alternative to Hospitalization, and Treatment Provision: The Utility of Community Treatment Orders.

Background: Provision of involuntary care is an abridgment of civil rights and a source of controversy. Its circumstances require continued monitoring. This study asks 4 questions: Whether, in an era, focused on allowing patients with capacity to refuse community-treatment-order (CTO)-assignments, CTO use decreased. And whether CTOs fulfilled 3 statute mandates: Were CTO-assigned patients in greater need of treatment than other psychiatric inpatients? Was CTO assignment a less-restrictive alternative to psychiatric hospitalization? and Did CTO assignment provide needed treatment at internationally recommended levels with consequences for patient outcomes? Method: All 214 388 Victoria, Australia mental health admissions between 2000- 2017 were reviewed. Two cohort samples were drawn and followed through 2019-ie, all 7826 hospitalized patients who were first placed on CTOs from 2010 to 2017 and 13 896 hospitalized patients without CTO placement. Logistic Regression was used to specify determinants of CTO assignment from the psychiatric inpatient population. OLS Regression with propensity score control to evaluate study questions. Results: In the 2010-2017 decade, initial CTO assignments decreased by 3.5%, and initial hospitalizations increased by 5.9% compared to the 2000-2009 period. At hospital admission and discharge, based on Health of the Nations Score ratings, the CTO-cohort's need for treatment exceeded that of non-CTO patients. CTO patients had 3.75 fewer days in average inpatient episode duration than other inpatients, when adjusted for CTO-assignment determinants, the ratio of patients to community case managers, and patient housing status. CTO patients needing rehospitalization spent 112.68 more days in the community than re-hospitalized non-CTO patients. Patient to case-manager ratios falling above recommended levels and the patient marginal housing status contributed to longer hospital stays and reduced community tenure. Conclusions: Victoria relied less on CTOs as an LRA, consequently, experiencing increased initial hospitalizations. CTO patients were in greater need of treatment than non-CTO patients, yet, with required oversite had shorter hospitalizations and more time out of hospital prior to rehospitalization than the less severely ill non-CTO group. Patient LRA outcomes were adversely affected by higher than recommended community patient to case-manager ratios limiting needed treatment provision to hospital.

Accessing acute medical care to protect health: the utility of community treatment orders.

Background: The conclusion that people with severe mental illness require involuntary care to protect their health (including threats due to physical-non-psychiatric-illness) is challenged by findings indicating that they often lack access to general healthcare and the assertion that they would access such care voluntarily if available and effective. Victoria, Australia's single-payer healthcare system provides accessible medical treatment; therefore, it is an excellent context in which to test these challenges. Aims: This study replicates a previous investigation in considering whether, in Australia's easy-access single-payer healthcare system, patients placed on community treatment orders, specifically involuntary community treatment, are more likely to access acute medical care addressing potentially life-threatening physical illnesses than voluntary patients with and without severe mental illness. Methods: Replicating methods used in 2000-2010, for the years 2010-2017, this study compared the acute medical care access of three new cohorts: 7826 hospitalised patients with severe mental illness who received a post-hospitalisation, community treatment order; 13 896 patients with severe mental illness released from the hospital without a community treatment order and 12 101 outpatients who were never psychiatrically hospitalised (individuals with less morbidity risk who were not considered to have severe mental illness) during periods when they were under versus outside community mental health supervision. Logistic regression was used to determine the influence of community-based community mental health supervision and the type of community mental health supervision (community treatment order vs non-community treatment order) on the likelihood of receiving an initial diagnosis of a life-threatening physical illness requiring acute care. Results: Validating their shared elevated morbidity risk, 43.7% and 46.7%, respectively, of each hospitalised cohort (community treatment order and non-community treatment order patients) accessed an initial acute-care diagnosis for a life-threatening condition vs 26.3% of outpatients. Outside community mental health supervision, the likelihood that a community treatment order patient would receive a diagnosis of physical illness was 36% lower than non-community treatment order patients-1.30 times that of outpatients. Under community mental health supervision, their likelihood was two times greater than that of non-community treatment order patients and 6.6 times that of outpatients. Each community treatment order episode was associated with a 14.6% increase in the likelihood of a community treatment order patient receiving a diagnosis. The results replicate those found in an independent 2000-2010 cohort comparison. Conclusions: Community mental health supervision, notably community treatment order supervision, in two independent investigations over two decades appeared to facilitate access to physical healthcare in acute care settings for patients with severe mental illness who were refusing treatment-a group that has been subject to excess morbidity and mortality.

The utility of outpatient commitment: Reduced-risks of victimization and crime perpetration.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient civil commitment (OCC) provisions, community treatment orders (CTOs) in Australia and Commonwealth nations, are part of mental health law worldwide. This study considers whether and by what means OCC provides statutorily required "needed-treatment" addressing two aspects of its legal mandate to protect the safety of self (exclusive of deliberate-self-harm) and others. METHOD: Over a 12.4-year period, records of hospitalized-psychiatric-patients, 11,424 with CTO-assignment and 16,161 without CTO-assignment were linked to police-records. Imminent-safety-threats included perpetrations and victimizations by homicides, rapes, assaults/abductions, and robberies. "Need for treatment" determinations were validated independently by Health of the Nations Scale (HoNOS) severity-score-profiles. Logistic regressions, with propensity-score- adjustment and control for 46 potential confounding-factors, were used to evaluate the association of CTO-assignment with occurrence-risk of perpetrations and victimizations. RESULTS: CTO-assignment was associated with reduced safety-risk: 17% in initial-perpetrations, 11% in initial-victimizations, and 22% for repeat-perpetrations. Each ten-community-treatment-days in interaction with CTO-assignment was associated with a 3.4% reduced-perpetration-risk. CTO-initiated-re-hospitalization was associated with a 13% reduced-initial-perpetration-risk, a 17% reduced-initial-victimization-risk, and a 22% reduced-repeat-victimization-risk. All risk-estimates appear to be the unique contributions of the CTO, CTO-initiated-re-hospitalization, or the provision of ten-community-treatment-days-i.e. after accounting for the influence of prior crimes and victimizations, ethnic-bias, neighborhood disadvantage and other between-group differences in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: CTO assignment's association with reduced criminal-victimization and perpetration-risk, in conjunction with requiring participation in needed-treatment via re-hospitalization and community-service, adds support to the conclusion that OCC is to some extent fulfilling its legal objectives related to protecting safety of self (exclusive of deliberate-self-harm), and others.

The utility of outpatient commitment: acute medical care access and protecting health.

OBJECTIVES: This study considers whether, in an easy access single-payer health care system, patients placed on outpatient commitment-community treatment orders (CTOs) in Victoria Australia-are more likely to access acute medical care addressing physical illness than voluntary patients with and without severe mental illness. METHOD: For years 2000 to 2010, the study compared acute medical care access of 27,585  severely mentally ill psychiatrically hospitalized patients (11,424 with and 16,161 without CTO exposure) and 12,229 never psychiatrically hospitalized outpatients (individuals with less morbidity risk as they were not considered to have severe mental illness). Logistic regression was used to determine the influence of the CTO on the likelihood of receiving a diagnosis of physical illness requiring acute care. RESULTS: Validating their shared and elevated morbidity risk, 53% of each hospitalized cohort accessed acute care compared to 32% of outpatients during the decade. While not under mental health system supervision, however, the likelihood that a CTO patient would receive a physical illness diagnosis was 31% lower than for non-CTO patients, and no different from lower morbidity-risk outpatients without severe mental illness. While, under mental health system supervision, the likelihood that CTO patients would receive a physical illness diagnosis was 40% greater than non-CTO patients and 5.02 times more likely than outpatients were. Each CTO episode was associated with a 4.6% increase in the likelihood of a member of the CTO group receiving a diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Mental health system involvement and CTO supervision appeared to facilitate access to physical health care in acute care settings for patients with severe mental illness, a group that has, in the past, been subject to excess morbidity and mortality.

The Utility of Outpatient Commitment: II. Mortality Risk and Protecting Health, Safety, and Quality of Life.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the contribution of a form of outpatient commitment-community treatment orders (CTOs)-to mortality risk and quality of life of patients with severe mental illness. METHODS: Data (2000--2012) were obtained from the Australian National Death Index, Victoria Department of Health, Victoria police records, and National Outcomes and CaseMix Collection quality-of-life records for patients in the Victorian Psychiatric Case Register/RAPID with a history of psychiatric hospitalization: CTO cohort, N=11,424; non-CTO cohort, N=16,161. The contribution of CTOs to mortality risk associated with CTO facilitation of access to general medical care and prevention of criminal involvement was assessed with logistic regression models. Cohort differences in quality of life were also examined. RESULTS: A total of 2,727 patients (10%) in the overall sample died, and the sample had a higher mortality risk than the general population. Probability of death by any cause was 9% lower in the CTO cohort than in the non-CTO cohort. Facilitation of access to medical care accounted for a 20% reduction in risk of non-injury-related deaths in the CTO cohort, compared with the non-CTO cohort. Risk of death by self-harm was 32% higher, compared with the non-CTO cohort. CTO placement appeared to lead to a gain of 3.8 years of life among men and 2.4 years among women, compared with the non-CTO cohort. Quality-of-life scores were modestly less favorable for the non-CTO cohort. CONCLUSIONS: CTO placement was associated with lower mortality risk via facilitated access to medical care and with modest enhancement of quality of life.

The Utility of Outpatient Commitment: I. A Need for Treatment and a Least Restrictive Alternative to Psychiatric Hospitalization.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined whether psychiatric patients assigned to community treatment orders (CTOs), outpatient commitment in Victoria, Australia, have a greater need for treatment to protect their health and safety than patients not assigned to CTOs. It also considered whether such treatment is provided in a least restrictive manner-that is, in a way that contributes to reduced use of psychiatric hospitalization. METHODS: The sample included 11,424 patients first placed on a CTO between 2000 and 2010, and 16,161 patients not placed on a CTO. Need for treatment was independently assessed with the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) at hospital admission and at discharge. Ordinary least-squares and Poisson regressions were used to assess savings in hospital days attributable to CTO placement. RESULTS: HoNOS ratings indicated that at admission and discharge, the CTO cohort's need for treatment exceeded that of the non-CTO cohort, particularly in areas indicating potential dangerous behavior. When analyses adjusted for the propensity to be selected into the CTO cohort and other factors, the mean duration of an inpatient episode was 4.6 days shorter for the CTO cohort than for the non-CTO cohort, and a reduction of 10.4 days per inpatient episode was attributable to each CTO placement. CONCLUSIONS: CTO placement may have helped patients with a greater need for treatment to experience shorter hospital stays. Whether the CTO directly enabled the fulfillment of unsought but required treatment needs that protected patient health and safety is a question that needs to be addressed in future research.