Norway introduced capacity-based legislation in mental healthcare on 1 September 2017 with the aim of increasing patient autonomy and legal protection and reducing the use of coercion. The new legislation was expected to be particularly important for patients under community treatment orders (CTOs).

To explore health professionals’ experiences of how capacity-based legislation affects healthcare services for patients whose compulsory treatment order was revoked as a result of being assessed as having capacity to consent.

Nine health professionals responsible for treatment and care of patients whose CTO was revoked owing to the new legislation were interviewed in depth from September 2019 to March 2020. We used a hermeneutic approach to the interviews and analysis of the transcripts.

The participants found that capacity-based legislation raised their awareness of their responsibility for patient autonomy and involvement in treatment and care. They also felt a need for more frequent assessments of patients’ condition and capacity to consent and more flexibility between levels of care.

The study shows that health professionals found that capacity-based legislation raised their awareness of their responsibility for patient autonomy and involvement in treatment and care. They sought closer dialogue with patients, providing information and advice, and more frequently assessing patients’ condition to adjust treatment and care to enable them to retain their capacity to consent. This could be challenging and required competence, continuity and close collaboration between personnel in different healthcare services at primary and specialist level.

Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics and community treatment orders (CTOs) are used in patients with schizophrenia to improve treatment effectiveness through adherence.

Understanding healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and associated costs, and medication adherence in patients with schizophrenia overall and by CTO status before and after second generation antipsychotic (SGA) LAI initiation may guide strategies to optimize health.

A retrospective observational single-arm study using administrative data from Alberta was performed. Adults with schizophrenia who initiated SGA-LAI (index date) were included. Medication possession ratio (MPR) was determined; paired t-tests were used to examine differences in HRU and costs ($CDN) between the 2-year pre-index period and 2-year post-index period. Stratified analysis by presence or absence of an active CTO during the pre-post periods was performed.

Among 1,211 patients who initiated SGA-LAIs, MPR was greater post-index (0.84) compared with pre-index (0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36, 0.41). All-cause and mental health-related HRU and costs were lower post-index versus pre-index (p<0.001); total all-cause HRU costs were $33,788 lower post- versus pre-index ($40,343 [standard deviation, SD $68,887] versus $74,131 [SD $75,941], 95% CI [-$38,993, -$28,583]), and total mental health-related HRU costs were $34,198 lower post- versus pre-index ($34,205 [SD $63,428] CDN versus $68,403 [SD $72,088] CDN, 95%CI [-$39,098, -$29,297]). Forty-three percent had ≥1 active CTO during the study period; HRU and costs varied according to CTO status.

SGA-LAIs are associated with improved adherence, and lower HRU and costs however the latter vary according to CTO status.

The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this abstract: SD and MS have no competing interest to declare. LR, SK, KW, and KM are members of the Real-World Evidence

Coercive treatment comprises a broad range of practices, ranging from implicit or explicit pressure to accept certain treatment to the use of forced practices such as involuntary admission, seclusion and restraint. Coercion is common in mental health services.

To evaluate the strength and credibility of evidence on the efficacy of interventions to reduce coercive treatment in mental health services. Protocol registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/S76T3.

Systematic literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Campbell Collaboration, and Epistemonikos from January 2010 to January 2020 for meta-analyses of randomised studies. Summary effects were recalculated using a common metric and random-effects models. We assessed between-study heterogeneity, predictive intervals, publication bias, small-study effects and whether the results of the observed positive studies were more than expected by chance. On the basis of these calculations, strength of associations was classified using quantitative umbrella review criteria, and credibility of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

A total of 23 primary studies (19 conducted in European countries and 4 in the USA) enrolling 8554 participants were included. The evidence on the efficacy of staff training to reduce use of restraint was supported by the most robust evidence (relative risk RR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.62–0.87; suggestive association, GRADE: moderate), followed by evidence on the efficacy of shared decision-making interventions to reduce involuntary admissions of adults with severe mental illness (RR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.60–0.92; weak association, GRADE: moderate) and by the evidence on integrated care interventions (RR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.46–0.95; weak association, GRADE: low). By contrast, community treatment orders and adherence therapy had no effect on involuntary admission rates.

Different levels of evidence indicate the benefit of staff training, shared decision-making interventions and integrated care interventions to reduce coercive treatment in mental health services. These different levels of evidence should be considered in the development of policy, clinical and implementation initiatives to reduce coercive practices in mental healthcare, and should lead to further studies in both high- and low-income countries to improve the strength and credibility of the evidence base.

Norway authorised out-patient commitment in 1961, but there is a lack of representative and complete data on the use of out-patient commitment orders.

To establish the incidence and prevalence rates on the use of out-patient commitment in Norway, and how these vary across service areas. Further, to study variations in out-patient commitment across service areas, and use of in-patient services before and after implementation of out-patient commitment orders. Finally, to identify determinants for the duration of out-patient commitment orders and time to readmission.

Retrospective case register study based on medical files of all patients with an out-patient commitment order in 2008–2012 in six catchment areas in Norway, covering one-third of the Norwegian population aged 18 years or more. For a subsample of patients, we recorded use of in-patient care 3 years before and after their first-ever out-patient commitment.

Annual incidence varied between 20.7 and 28.4, and prevalence between 36.5 and 48.9, per 100 000 population aged 18 years or above. Rates differed significantly between catchment areas. Mean out-patient commitment duration was 727 days (s.d. = 889). Use of in-patient care decreased significantly in the 3 years after out-patient commitment compared with the 3 years before. Use of antipsychotic medication through the whole out-patient commitment period and fewer in-patient episodes in the 3 years before out-patient commitment predicted longer time to readmission.

Mechanisms behind the pronounced variations in use of out-patient commitment between sites call for further studies. Use of in-patient care was significantly reduced in the 3 years after a first-ever out-patient commitment order was made.

None.

We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the National Audit of Psychosis to identify factors associated with use of community treatment orders (CTOs) and assess the quality of care that people on CTOs receive.

Between 1.1 and 20.2% of patients in each trust were being treated on a CTO. Male gender, younger age, greater use of in-patient services, coexisting substance misuse and problems with cognition predicted use of CTOs. Patients on CTOs were more likely to be screened for physical health, have a current care plan, be given contact details for crisis support, and be offered cognitive–behavioural therapy.

CTOs appear to be used as a framework for delivering higher-quality care to people with more complex needs. High levels of variation in the use of CTOs indicate a need for better evidence about the effects of this approach to patient care.