RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Consent is a prerequisite for medical diagnostic and therapeutic action. There is no standardised procedure for assessing the ability to give consent. The most widely used tool for structured assessment is the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T). OBJECTIVES: People with dementia have impaired capacity to consent because of their disease. In order to answer the question to what extent structured assessment procedures can be usefully applied to people with dementia, we analyse the function, strengths and weaknesses of structured assessment procedures with a focus on the MacCAT-T and discuss suggestions for modification and further development of the tool. METHODS: Using the PubMed literature database, a systematic literature search and analysis was conducted on papers published since 2010, following PRISMA guidelines.Results Although the MacCAT-T is a valid and reliable tool, it cannot comprehensively address memory problems in people with dementia. It primarily measures cognitive functions. However, Decisions based on emotions, intuitions and values, are not captured by the MacCAT-T. Communicative limitations in people with dementia are not taken into account. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended to provide information in simple language, written down and visualised for people with dementia. The development and elaboration of a graduated procedure for the examination of capacity to consent is indicated. The gradations of the scope and depth of the assessment to be determined should be based on the severity of the cognitive impairment, the benefit/risk ratio of the proposed medical intervention and the individual profile of affective functions and value-based imprints.
RESUMEN
Background: Consent to treatment is a cornerstone of medical ethics and law. Nevertheless, very little empirical evidence is available to inform clinicians and policymakers regarding the capacities of forensic patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSDs) to make decisions about their treatment, with the risk of clinical and legal inertia, silent coercion, stigmatization, or ill-conceived reforms. Study Design: In this multinational study, we assessed and compared with treatment-related decisional capacities in forensic and non-forensic patients with SSD. 160 forensic and 139 non-forensic patients were used in Austria, Germany, Italy, Poland, and England. Their capacity to consent to treatment was assessed by means of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T). Multiple generalized linear regression models were used to identify the socio-demographic and clinical variables associated with MacCAT-T scores. Study Results: In total, 55 forensic (34.4%) and 58 non-forensic patients (41.7%) showed high treatment-related decisional capacity, defined as scoring ≥75% of the maximum scores for the understanding, appreciation and reasoning, and 2 for expressing a choice. Forensic patients showed differences in their capacity to consent to treatment across countries. Of all socio-demographic and clinical variables, only "social support" was directly relevant to policy. Conclusions: Forensic patients have treatment-related decisional capacities comparable with their non-forensic counterparts. Social contacts might provide a substantial contribution towards enhancing the decisional autonomy of both forensic and non-forensic patients, hence improving the overall quality and legitimacy of mental health care.