Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-8gtf8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-14T23:17:32.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In hospital, at home, or not at all

A cross-sectional survey of patient preferences for receipt of compulsory treatment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Mike J. Crawford ,
Rebecca Gibbon ,
Elizabeth Ellis  and
Hannah Waters
Mike J. Crawford
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Medicine, Imperial College London, Paterson Centre, 20 South Wharf Road, London W2 1PD (tel: 0207 886 1993, fax: 0207 8861995; e-mail: [email protected])
Rebecca Gibbon
Affiliation:
Imperial College London
Elizabeth Ellis
Affiliation:
Imperial College London
Hannah Waters
Affiliation:
Imperial College London
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims and Method

In view of plans to reform Mental Health Act legislation to allow compulsory treatment in the community, we examined the views of service users about this form of care, and the most acceptable setting for its delivery. A cross-sectional survey of patients discharged from two in-patient units in West London over a 5-month period was carried out.

Results

Half of the 109 respondents stated that compulsory treatment was justified under some circumstances; 103 people told us where they would prefer to receive compulsory treatment – 49 in their home, 41 in hospital and 13 in a community treatment centre. The most commonly stated reason for favouring home treatment was dislike of in-patient care.

Clinical Implications

Compulsory treatment in the community may provide a means of improving patient experiences of non-consensual care. However, a significant minority of service users would rather this form of treatment was restricted to in-patient units. Continuing efforts are required to improve patient experiences of in-patient care.

Type
Original Papers
Information
Psychiatric Bulletin , Volume 28 , Issue 10 , October 2004 , pp. 360 - 363
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2004

References

Crawford, M. J., Hopkins, W. & Henderson, C. (2000) Concerns over reform of the Mental Health Act [letter]. British Journal of Psychiatry, 177, 563.Google Scholar
David, A. S. (1990) Insight and psychosis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 798–808.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department of Health (1999) Reform of the Mental Health Act 1983: Proposals for Consultation. London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Greenwood, N., Key, A., Burns, T., et al (1999) Satisfaction with inpatient psychiatric services. Relationship to patient and treatment factors. British Journal of Psychiatry, 174, 159–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, H. (2002) Acute wards: problems and solutions. Psychiatric Bulletin, 26, 428–430.Google Scholar
Mind (2004) Are You Listening? Service Users Speak Out About Mental Health Act Reform. London: Mind.Google Scholar
Moncrieff, J. & Smyth, M. (1999) Community treatment orders – a bridge too far? Psychiatric Bulletin, 23, 644–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Schizophrenia Fellowship (1999) Better Act Now! NSF's Views in the Mental Health Act Review. London: NSF.Google Scholar
Pinfold, V., Rowe, A., Hatfield, B., et al (2002) Lines of resistance: exploring professionals' views of compulsory community supervision. Journal of Mental Health, 11, 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shipley, K., Hilborn, B., Hansell, A., et al (2000) Patient satisfaction: a valid index of quality of care in a psychiatric service. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 101, 303–333.Google Scholar
Swartz, M. S., Swanson, J.W., Wagner, H. R., et al (2003) Assessment of four stakeholder groups' preferences concerning outpatient commitment for persons with schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 1139–1146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.