[Definition, derogation and application of the professional secrecy within the frame of court ordered cares: A systematic review of the French legal and health literature since 1998]. / Définitions, dérogations et applications du secret professionnel dans le cadre des soins pénalement ordonnées : revue de la littérature médicale et juridique française depuis 1998.

INTRODUCTION: Guaranteed by several legal and deontological dispositions, professional secrecy is an essential aspect of medical care, especially concerning the therapeutic alliance. Since the creation in French law of court-ordered treatment, some information is likely to be shared between actors either from the field of healthcare or of justice. This questions the type of information that can be shared and the variances existing between the different types of court-ordered treatments, which are to be known by the professionals. METHODS: Following the methodology of the French Haute Autorité de Santé, a systematic review of the legal and health literature has been conducted. Different databases such as PubMed, Cairn and Legifrance have been reviewed with the following keywords « secret ¼, « injonction de soins ¼ (court-ordered treatment) and « obligation de soins ¼ (obligation of care). Only the French literature since 1998 has been retained and because it is often less pronounced by the courts, the case of the therapeutic injunction, which represents the third type of court-ordered care, has been excluded. RESULTS: Concerning the court-ordered treatment, on the one hand, the coordinating physician addresses the elements required in the control of measure to the Executive Magistrate. On the other hand, the Executive Magistrate sends a copy of the piece of the procedure to the coordinating physician, who transmits it to the general practitioner. The therapist can derogate from the medical secrecy in some circumstances as said in the law, either through the coordinating physician or the Executive Magistrate. In the case of obligation of care, where there is no coordinating physician, the general practitioner is still submitted to the classical rules of medical secrecy and only has to produce certificates of the follow-up with the patient. DISCUSSION: Some authors have expressed their reservations about these new laws of derogation, especially concerning the blurred lines of the exception to these laws. Others have underlined the astonishing differences between court-ordered treatment and the obligation of care for almost similar clinical situations. CONCLUSION: The rules of shared information must be known by the professionals and stated clearly to the patient at the beginning of treatment. Then, professionals are invited to remain thoughtful concerning the nature of this information. Finally, and as the public hearing of June 2018, promoted by the FFCRIAVS (Fédération Française des Centres Ressources pour les Intervenants auprès des Auteurs de Violences Sexuelles), said, it could be interesting to promote meeting spaces between the different actors of the management of people under court ordered cares, so as to better identify the limits of each one.

[Towards better management for sexual offenders: Presentation and conclusions of a public hearing concerning prevention, assessment, and care]. / Audition publique auteurs de violences sexuelles : prévention, évaluation, prise en charge des 14 et 15 juin 2018 : perspectives et préconisations.

In France, since the law of June 17, 1998, sexual offenders may be convicted to ambulatory mandatory care, articulated with the justice. Twenty years after the implementation of this law, while social and technological developments have redefined certain aspects of delinquency, reference documents and practice guidelines remain to be updated. This is why the professionals of the main structures and associations dealing with perpetrators of sexual violence organized a public hearing under the sponsorship of the French Federation of Resource Centers for Sexual Violence Perpetrators (FFCRIAVS) according to the methodology and with the accompaniment of the High Authority of Health. This article presents the global methodology of the public hearing "Sexual Offenders: Prevention, Evaluation and Care" which was conducted on June 14 and 15, 2018. Thirty-three experts replied to27 questions and presented their conclusions to an Audition Committee and an audience of 200 persons representative of the civil and professional society. After a public debate, the hearing committee prepared a report in which they proposed propositions in order to better care for sexual offenders.

[Mental health care in French correctional facilities during the Covid-19 pandemic]. / Prisons confinées : quelles conséquences pour les soins psychiatriques et la santé mentale des personnes détenues en France ?

OBJECTIVE: The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the 11 million people currently incarcerated worldwide is the subject of many concerns. Prisons and jails are filled with people suffering from many preexisting medical conditions increasing the risk of complications. Detainees' access to medical services is already limited and overcrowding poses a threat of massive contagion. Beyond the health impact of the crisis, the tightening of prison conditions worries. On March 16, 2020, in France, the lockdown measures have been accompanied by specific provisions for prisons: all facilities have suspended visitations, group activities and external interventions. Over 10,000 prisoners have been released to reduce the prison population and the risk of virus propagation. These adjustments had major consequences on the healthcare system in French prisons. The objectives of this article are to describe the reorganization of the three levels of psychiatric care for inmates in France in the context of Covid-19 pandemic and to have a look at the impact of lockdown measures and early releases on mental health of prisoners. METHODS: This work is based on a survey conducted in April 2020 in France among psychiatric healthcare providers working in 42 ambulatory units for inmates and in the 9 full-time inpatient psychiatric wards exclusively for inmates called "UHSAs" (which stands for "unités hospitalières spécialement aménagées", and can be translated as "specially equipped hospital units"). A review of the international literature on mental healthcare system for inmates during the Covid-19 epidemic has also been performed. RESULTS: The Covid-19 epidemic has been rather contained during the period of confinement in French prisons but the impact of confinement measures on the prison population is significant. The three levels of psychiatric care for inmates have implemented specific measures to ensure continuity of care, to support detainees during Coronavirus lockdown and to prevent an infection's spread. Among the most important are: limitation of medical consultations to serious and urgent cases, creation of "Covid units", cancellation of voluntary psychiatric hospitalizations, reinforcement of preventive hygiene measures and reshuffling of medical staff. Prolonged confinement has consequences on mental health of detainees. Currently, mental health workers are facing multiple clinical situations such as forced drug and substance withdrawal (linked to difficulties in supplying psychoactive substances), symptoms of anxiety (due to concerns for their own and their relatives' well-being) and decompensation among patients with severe psychiatric conditions. Early releases from prison may also raise some issues. People recently released from prison are identified as at high risk of death by suicide and drug overdose. The lack of time to provide the necessary link between health services within prisons and health structures outside could have serious consequences, emphasizing the well-known "revolving prison doors" effect. DISCUSSION: The current lockdown measures applied in French jails and prisons point out the disparities between psychiatric care for inmates and psychiatric care for general population. Giving the high vulnerability of prison population, public health authorities should pay more attention to health care in prisons.

Factitious disorders in the hand-Main diagnostic traps highlighted with 3 cases.

Every doctor can be confronted, during his career, with patients presenting symptoms they created themselves. Because it is easily accessible, the hand is a favored target organ for these self-inflicted injuries. The diagnosis of factitious disorder of the hand is very difficult, rarely suggested and widely under-estimated. The real issue is detecting it early on to develop a cohesive diagnostic and therapeutic approach. The three clinical cases reported in this article illustrate the difficulty of caring for this pathology at all stages, from diagnosis to treatment. These disorders must be distinguished from malingering. A psychiatrist must be part of the treatment team. The prognosis of factitious disorders is poor. It is vital to maintain contact with the patient once the diagnosis is established. The risk is that the patient consults with other professionals, restarting a new cycle. The featured clinical cases were chosen to remind surgeons that factitious disorders of the hand are a recognized psychiatric disease. It must be evoked in the context of an unusual injury with a vague history. Everything possible must be done to confirm the diagnosis and avoid surgery.

[Work satisfaction and exhaustion among psychiatrists in psychiatric emergency services]. / Facteurs de satisfaction et d'épuisement des psychiatres aux urgences.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Psychiatric emergency services (PES) have recently occupied a new and growing place in the landscape of mental health services. However, few data are available on the way psychiatrists practice in the PES. Our aim was to survey psychiatrists working in PES, focusing on their job satisfaction and the theoretical models they use in their everyday practice. METHOD: We sent a survey to a sample of 508 psychiatrists working in PES in France. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-seven psychiatrists returned the survey, yielding a response rate of 47%. On a 0 to 10 scale, the mean level of job satisfaction was 6.7 (SD: 1.92). Participants reported that facing a variety of clinical situations and playing a key-coordinating role in the mental health system were the two most specific features of emergency psychiatry. The main sources of dissatisfaction were organizational issues and stressful clinical experiences, including violence or hostility. Sixty-three percent (n=150) of participants reported using more than two theoretical models in their practice, while the use of crisis models was reported by almost 40% of them. When assessed for suggestions to improve the PES, the majority of participants indicated that efforts should be focused on organizational factors. CONCLUSION: While emergency psychiatry could appear as an ungrateful practice, the majority of psychiatrists who responded to our survey reported satisfaction with their work and highlighted its unique particularities. Future research and collaborations are needed to identify organizational models of PES and their better integration in mental health networks.