Benefits following community treatment orders have an inverse relationship with rates of use: meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Community treatment orders
Indigenous Australian
compulsory community treatment
ethnic minority
out-patient commitment
Journal
BJPsych open
ISSN: 2056-4724
Titre abrégé: BJPsych Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101667931
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Apr 2023
14 Apr 2023
Historique:
medline:
15
4
2023
entrez:
14
4
2023
pubmed:
15
4
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Community treatment order (CTO) use in Australia and New Zealand ranges from less than 40 per 100 000 population in Western Australia and Canterbury to over 100 per 100 000 in Victoria, South Australia and Waitemata. Recent publications on CTO use now permit a meta-regression to investigate whether differences in CTO use by jurisdiction affect either the possible predictors or outcomes of CTOs. To assess whether factors associated with CTO placement or subsequent outcomes vary by rates of use. A systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PsycINFO for any Australian or New Zealand study comparing CTO cases with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. This study was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (protocol registration number: CRD42022351500). There were 35 articles from 16 studies identified in the search, plus unpublished data from a further study. Of these, 29 publications were included in meta-analyses. Two were from New Zealand. People who were male, single and not engaged in work, study or home duties were significantly more likely to be on CTOs. In addition, those from migrant backgrounds were 47% more likely to be on an order. On meta-regression, cases in jurisdictions with higher CTO rates had higher proportions of females or individuals with diagnoses other than non-affective psychoses. High-use jurisdictions were also less likely to show reductions in readmission rates or bed-days. There are marked differences in the possible predictors and outcomes of CTO placement between high- and low-use jurisdictions in Australia and New Zealand. These findings may have implications elsewhere and indicate that better-targeted CTO placement might improve outcomes.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Community treatment order (CTO) use in Australia and New Zealand ranges from less than 40 per 100 000 population in Western Australia and Canterbury to over 100 per 100 000 in Victoria, South Australia and Waitemata. Recent publications on CTO use now permit a meta-regression to investigate whether differences in CTO use by jurisdiction affect either the possible predictors or outcomes of CTOs.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
To assess whether factors associated with CTO placement or subsequent outcomes vary by rates of use.
METHOD
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PsycINFO for any Australian or New Zealand study comparing CTO cases with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. This study was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (protocol registration number: CRD42022351500).
RESULTS
RESULTS
There were 35 articles from 16 studies identified in the search, plus unpublished data from a further study. Of these, 29 publications were included in meta-analyses. Two were from New Zealand. People who were male, single and not engaged in work, study or home duties were significantly more likely to be on CTOs. In addition, those from migrant backgrounds were 47% more likely to be on an order. On meta-regression, cases in jurisdictions with higher CTO rates had higher proportions of females or individuals with diagnoses other than non-affective psychoses. High-use jurisdictions were also less likely to show reductions in readmission rates or bed-days.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
There are marked differences in the possible predictors and outcomes of CTO placement between high- and low-use jurisdictions in Australia and New Zealand. These findings may have implications elsewhere and indicate that better-targeted CTO placement might improve outcomes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37056174
doi: 10.1192/bjo.2023.28
pii: S2056472423000285
pmc: PMC10134313
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
e68Subventions
Organisme : National Health and Medical Research Council
ID : Emerging Leadership Fellowship: GNT1194635
Références
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2016 Apr;50(4):363-70
pubmed: 26304675
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Aug 18;151(4):264-9, W64
pubmed: 19622511
Australas Psychiatry. 2016 Jun;24(3):272-7
pubmed: 26400449
Ther Adv Psychopharmacol. 2011 Apr;1(2):37-45
pubmed: 23983926
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Nov;64(11):1187-97
pubmed: 21477993
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2000 Oct;34(5):801-8
pubmed: 11037366
Australas Psychiatry. 2022 Jun;30(3):346-351
pubmed: 35100901
Psychiatr Serv. 2017 Dec 1;68(12):1247-1254
pubmed: 28760100
Psychiatry Res. 2014 Mar 30;215(3):574-8
pubmed: 24439299
Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2021 Sep 30;17:100275
pubmed: 34734198
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2010 Dec;44(12):1126-31
pubmed: 21070108
Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Dec;5(12):1013-1022
pubmed: 30391280
Australas Psychiatry. 2014 Apr 14;22(4):352-356
pubmed: 24733307
Psychiatry Res. 2015 Dec 15;230(2):400-5
pubmed: 26416586
Br J Psychiatry. 2003 Feb;182:105-16
pubmed: 12562737
BMJ. 2002 May 25;324(7348):1244
pubmed: 12028977
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2021 Jan-Feb;74:101664
pubmed: 33316696
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2019 Jan - Feb;62:85-89
pubmed: 30616858
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2019 May - Jun;64:83-87
pubmed: 31122644
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2008 Aug;42(8):732-9
pubmed: 18622781
Soc Work Health Care. 2009;48(3):232-42
pubmed: 19360528
Psychiatr Serv. 2006 Nov;57(11):1600-6
pubmed: 17085608
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2020 Jan;54(1):76-88
pubmed: 31558041
Med J Aust. 2012 May 21;196(9):591-3
pubmed: 22621153
Soc Work Health Care. 2006;43(2-3):37-51
pubmed: 16956852
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2006 Nov-Dec;29(6):525-34
pubmed: 17070577
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2006 Mar-Apr;29(2):145-58
pubmed: 16412508
Epidemiol Perspect Innov. 2011 Feb 02;8(1):1
pubmed: 21288353
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2021 Jul;55(7):650-665
pubmed: 32921145
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2022 Jul-Aug;83:101813
pubmed: 35759935
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2011 Dec;9(4):403-19
pubmed: 22093389
Psychiatr Serv. 2006 Nov;57(11):1607-13
pubmed: 17085609
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2016 Apr;50(4):381-2
pubmed: 26362605
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2022 Jul;56(7):788-799
pubmed: 34340594
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2019 Mar;53(3):228-235
pubmed: 29485289
J Cult Divers. 2007 Summer;14(2):96-105
pubmed: 19175250
Australas Psychiatry. 2012 Dec;20(6):478-82
pubmed: 23136187
Schizophr Res. 2017 Jul;185:67-72
pubmed: 28038921
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Mar 17;3:CD004408
pubmed: 28303578
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2004 Aug;38(8):613-8
pubmed: 15298583
Br J Psychiatry. 2007 Nov;191:373-4
pubmed: 17978314
Ethn Health. 2014;19(2):217-39
pubmed: 23844602
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2019 Jan - Feb;62:154-159
pubmed: 30274852
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2006 Jul;41(7):574-9
pubmed: 16685479
Acta Odontol Scand. 2021 Mar;79(2):147-155
pubmed: 33103533
BJPsych Open. 2022 Aug 01;8(5):e145
pubmed: 35913107
J Psychiatr Res. 2013 May;47(5):650-6
pubmed: 23415453
Psychiatr Serv. 2006 Nov;57(11):1614-22
pubmed: 17085610
Australas Psychiatry. 2021 Apr;29(2):163-168
pubmed: 33354991