Use of compulsory community treatment in mental healthcare: An integrative review of stakeholders' opinions.

Background: Multiple studies have examined the effects of compulsory community treatment (CCT), amongst them there were three randomized controlled trials (RCT). Overall, they do not find that CCT affects clinical outcomes or reduces the number or duration of hospital admissions more than voluntary care does. Despite these negative findings, in many countries CCT is still used. One of the reasons may be that stakeholders favor a mental health system including CCT. Aim: This integrative review investigated the opinions of stakeholders (patients, significant others, mental health workers, and policy makers) about the use of CCT. Methods: We performed an integrative review; to include all qualitative and quantitative manuscripts on the views of patients, significant others, clinicians and policy makers regarding the use of CCT, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley), and Google Scholar. Results: We found 142 studies investigating the opinion of stakeholders (patients, significant others, and mental health workers) of which 55 were included. Of these 55 studies, 29 included opinions of patients, 14 included significant others, and 31 included mental health care workers. We found no studies that included policy makers. The majority in two of the three stakeholder groups (relatives and mental health workers) seemed to support a system that used CCT. Patients were more hesitant, but they generally preferred CCT over admission. All stakeholder groups expressed ambivalence. Their opinions did not differ clearly between those who did and did not have experience with CCT. Advantages mentioned most regarded accessibility of care and a way to remain in contact with patients, especially during times of crisis or deterioration. The most mentioned disadvantage by all stakeholder groups was that CCT restricted autonomy and was coercive. Other disadvantages mentioned were that CCT was stigmatizing and that it focused too much on medication. Conclusion: Stakeholders had mixed opinions regarding CCT. While a majority seemed to support the use of CCT, they also had concerns, especially regarding the restrictions CCT imposed on patients' freedom and autonomy, stigmatization, and the focus on medication.

The Active Recovery Triad monitor: evaluation of a model fidelity scale for recovery-oriented care in long-term mental health care settings.

OBJECTIVE: The Active Recovery Triad (ART) model is a recently developed care model for people who are admitted to an institutional setting for several years and receive 24-h mental health care and support. This study focuses on the ART monitor, a model fidelity scale that measures the degree of compliance with the ART model. Our aim is to evaluate the psychometric properties of the ART monitor and to further improve the instrument. METHODS: Fifteen teams at the start (n = 7, group 1) or in the process (6 months to three years) of implementing care according to the ART model (n = 8, group 2) were audited using the ART monitor. Auditors were trained care workers, peer workers, and family peer workers. Auditors and team members provided feedback on the instrument. The content validity, construct validity and inter-rater reliability of the ART monitor were investigated. Based on the outcomes of these psychometric properties, the ART monitor was finalized. RESULTS: Regarding content validity, auditors and teams indicated that they perceived the ART monitor to be a useful instrument. In terms of construct validity, a significant difference (t(13) = 2.53, p < 0.05) was found between teams at the start of the implementation process (group 1, average score of 2.42 (SD = 0.44)) and teams with a longer duration of implementation (group 2, average score of 2.95 (SD = 0.37)). When allowing for a one-point difference in scores, 88% of the items had an inter-rater agreement over 65%. Items with a relatively low inter-rater reliability, in combination with feedback from auditors and teams regarding content validity, provided direction for further improvement and revision of the instrument. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that the revised ART monitor is feasible and useful in mental health care practice. However, further evaluation of its psychometric properties will be needed.

Communities of Practice in Acute and Forensic Psychiatry: Lessons Learned and Perceived Effects.

In the Netherlands, two new approaches have been developed for acute and forensic psychiatry, called High and Intensive Care (HIC) and Forensic High and Intensive Care (FHIC). The models provide standards for temporary high-quality clinical care for patients in crisis and combine practices to reduce seclusion. To support the implementation of these approaches, Communities of Practice (CoPs) were created, including peer providers, mental health nurses, psychiatrists and managers. CoPs are increasingly used in healthcare. However, CoPs vary greatly in form and objective, and more insight is needed in the organisation and facilitation of CoPs. Therefore, the aim of this study is to gain insight into the lessons learned and perceived effects of the CoPs. A qualitative approach was used. Data were collected through focus groups (n = 3) with participants in the CoPs, feedback meetings with teams implementing HIC (n = 78) or FHIC (n = 23), and observations by the researchers. Data were analysed thematically. Lessons learned are: 1) create an ambassador role for CoP participants, 2) organize concrete activities, 3) take care of a multidisciplinary composition, and 4) foster shared responsibility and work on sustainability. Perceived effects of the CoPs were: 1) support of HIC and FHIC implementation, 2) creation of a national movement, and 3) further development of the HIC and FHIC approaches. The audits served as an important vehicle to activate the CoPs, and stimulated the implementation of HIC and FHIC. The findings may help others in creating a CoP when it comes to the implementation of best practices and improving healthcare.

High and Intensive Care in Psychiatry: A New Model for Acute Inpatient Care.

In response to three reforms in Dutch mental health care, an organizational framework, including methods and interventions, was developed as part of a new model for acute inpatient care. Core elements of high and intensive care (HIC) include preventing seclusion by means of a stepped-care principle; a six-step process of admission, treatment, and care; combining medical and recovery approaches; combining professional and experiential knowledge; and providing a healing environment. The HIC model differs from the utilization of psychiatric intensive care units in that it focuses on collaboration with outpatient care; establishing contact between staff, patients, and relatives; and minimizing coercion.