Te Pou - Home

o Te Whakaara Nui

Database of New Zealand mental health research

Print

Status
Completed 14 September 2006

Created
24 September 2009

Last updated
25 September 2009

Dilemmas for clinicians in use of community treatment orders

Investigator(s) / AuthorsRichard Mullen, John Dawson, Anita Gibbs

 
Principal contact
Name Dr Richard Mullen
Email Email address is not available; please contact
keadmin@tepou.co.nz for more information.
The research
Summary Clinicians who treat patients using Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) face many potential dilemmas in their relations with involuntary outpatients and the exercise of their powers. We compare the dilemmas identified in the literature with those reported by responsible clinicians in New Zealand (NZ).
Objectives Clinicians who treat patients using Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) face many potential dilemmas in their relations with involuntary outpatients and the exercise of their powers.
Study design We compare the dilemmas identified in the literature with those reported by responsible clinicians in New Zealand (NZ).
Methods Qualitative
Results These clinicians experienced a number of well-known dilemmas, such as determining the right moment for a person's discharge from a CTO, but they seemed less troubled by some other difficulties than might be expected, usually because they considered involuntary outpatient treatment the best option for the patient or the best way to manage the risks involved. Further dilemmas were identified by the NZ clinicians that have not been widely discussed, concerning the proper scope of clinical authority over patients under CTOs and the decision to revoke involuntary outpatient status.
Conclusions In conclusion some suggestions are made as to how clinicians might best manage the dilemmas involved.
Key Descriptors Clinical Practice
Disciplines Multi disciplinary
Settings Outpatient
Diagnostic Categories Other, Psychotic Disorders
Populations General Population
Other Keywords Community treatment orders, clinicians, mental health care
Ethics approval Yes
Academic led Yes
Service led No
How were service users involved No involvement
Publication in peer review journal Yes
Supporting information
Uploaded files
Links
 

Page last updated: 7 November 2008