Understanding increasing rates of psychiatric hospital detentions in England: development and preliminary testing of an explanatory model.

BACKGROUND: The steep rise in the rate of psychiatric hospital detentions in England is poorly understood. AIMS: To identify explanations for the rise in detentions in England since 1983; to test their plausibility and support from evidence; to develop an explanatory model for the rise in detentions. METHOD: Hypotheses to explain the rise in detentions were identified from previous literature and stakeholder consultation. We explored associations between national indicators for potential explanatory variables and detention rates in an ecological study. Relevant research was scoped and the plausibility of each hypothesis was rated. Finally, a logic model was developed to illustrate likely contributory factors and pathways to the increase in detentions. RESULTS: Seventeen hypotheses related to social, service, legal and data-quality factors. Hypotheses supported by available evidence were: changes in legal approaches to patients without decision-making capacity but not actively objecting to admission; demographic changes; increasing psychiatric morbidity. Reductions in the availability or quality of community mental health services and changes in police practice may have contributed to the rise in detentions. Hypothesised factors not supported by evidence were: changes in community crisis care, compulsory community treatment and prescribing practice. Evidence was ambiguous or lacking for other explanations, including the impact of austerity measures and reductions in National Health Service in-patient bed numbers. CONCLUSIONS: Better data are needed about the characteristics and service contexts of those detained. Our logic model highlights likely contributory factors to the rise in detentions in England, priorities for future research and potential policy targets for reducing detentions.

Reliability of mental capacity assessments in psychiatric in-patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous work on the reliability of mental capacity assessments in patients with psychiatric illness has been limited. AIMS: To describe the interrater reliability of two independent assessments of capacity to consent to treatment, as well as assessments made by a panel of clinicians based on the same interview. METHOD: Fifty-five patients were interviewed by two interviewers 1-7 days apart and a binary (yes/no) capacity judgement was made, guided by the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T). Four senior clinicians used transcripts of the interviews to judge capacity. RESULTS: There was excellent agreement between the two interviewers for capacity judgements made at separate interviews (kappa=0.82). A high level of agreement was seen between senior clinicians for capacity judgements of the same interview (mean kappa=0.84). CONCLUSIONS: In combination with a clinical interview, the MacCAT-T can be used to produce highly reliable judgements of capacity.

Prevalence and predictors of mental incapacity in psychiatric in-patients.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the proportion of psychiatric in-patients who lack capacity to make treatment decisions, or the associations of lack of capacity. AIMS: To determine the prevalence of psychiatric in-patients who lack capacity to make decisions about current treatment and to identify demographic and clinical associations with lack of mental capacity. METHOD: Patients (n=112) were interviewed soon after admission to hospital and a binary judgement of capacity was made, guided by the MacArthur Competence Tool for Treatment. Demographic and clinical information was collected from an interview and case notes. RESULTS: Of the 112 participants, 49 (43.8%) lacked treatment-related decisional capacity. Mania and psychosis, poor insight, delusions and Black and minority ethnic group were associated with mental incapacity. Of the 49 patients lacking capacity, 30 (61%) were detained under the Mental Health Act 1983. Of the 63 with capacity, 6 (9.5%) were detained. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of treatment-related decisional capacity is a common but by no means inevitable correlate of admission to a psychiatric in-patient unit.

Psychopharmacological treatment of depression, anxiety, irritability and insomnia in patients receiving interferon-alpha: a prospective case series and a discussion of biological mechanisms.

We studied 60 patients receiving a 1-year course of interferon (IFN)-alpha therapy for chronic viral hepatitis. Patients underwent psychiatric assessment before starting the IFN-alpha therapy, and monthly throughout the therapy, using the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-III-R, the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory and the Spielberg State and Trait Anxiety Inventory. Five patients had a baseline diagnosis of major depression and 18 (30%) developed an IFN-alpha-induced psychiatric adverse effect; 12 of these 23 patients received psychopharmacological treatment (patients and clinicians jointly decided the need for treatment). Two of the five patients with baseline depression started an antidepressant treatment (paroxetine) together with the IFN-alpha and successfully completed the IFN-alpha therapy. Ten patients received treatment for the IFN-alpha-induced psychiatric adverse effects (depression in five patients, anxiety in two patients, severe irritability in two patients and insomnia in one patient). Depression was treated with paroxetine, amisulpride or levosulpiride; anxiety and insomnia were treated with benzodiazepines; and irritability was treated with thioridazine. Individual response to medications was measured with the Clinical Global Impression scale. Of the patients with IFN-alpha-induced depression, two received paroxetine (one showed a good response), two received amisulpride (one showed a good response) and one did not respond to levosulpiride but responded to paroxetine. The patients experiencing anxiety or insomnia responded well to benzodiazepines. One patient showed a good response, and one a poor response, to thioridazine for irritability. Only one patient interrupted the therapy because of psychiatric adverse effects. Overall, the 12 patients that received psychopharmacological treatment developed less severe psychopathological symptoms during the IFN-alpha therapy compared to the 11 patients who had untreated baseline depression or untreated IFN-alpha-induced psychiatric adverse effects. Thus, psychopharmacological management can successfully treat psychiatric symptoms in patients who are receiving IFN-alpha.