50
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      CRIMSON [CRisis plan IMpact: Subjective and Objective coercion and eNgagement] Protocol: A randomised controlled trial of joint crisis plans to reduce compulsory treatment of people with psychosis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The use of compulsory treatment under the Mental Health Act (MHA) has continued to rise in the UK and in other countries. The Joint Crisis Plan (JCP) is a statement of service users' wishes for treatment in the event of a future mental health crisis. It is developed with the clinical team and an independent facilitator. A recent pilot RCT showed a reduction in the use of the MHA amongst service users with a JCP. The JCP is the only intervention that has been shown to reduce compulsory treatment in this way. The CRIMSON trial aims to determine if JCPs, compared with treatment as usual, are effective in reducing the use of the MHA in a range of treatment settings across the UK.

          Methods/Design

          This is a 3 centre, individual-level, single-blind, randomised controlled trial of the JCP compared with treatment as usual for people with a history of relapsing psychotic illness in Birmingham, London and Lancashire/Manchester. 540 service users will be recruited across the three sites. Eligible service users will be adults with a diagnosis of a psychotic disorder (including bipolar disorder), treated in the community under the Care Programme Approach with at least one admission to a psychiatric inpatient ward in the previous two years. Current inpatients and those subject to a community treatment order will be excluded to avoid any potential perceived pressure to participate. Research assessments will be conducted at baseline and 18 months. Following the baseline assessment, eligible service users will be randomly allocated to either develop a Joint Crisis Plan or continue with treatment as usual. Outcome will be assessed at 18 months with assessors blind to treatment allocation. The primary outcome is the proportion of service users treated or otherwise detained under an order of the Mental Health Act (MHA) during the follow-up period, compared across randomisation groups. Secondary outcomes include overall costs, service user engagement, perceived coercion and therapeutic relationships. Sub-analyses will explore the effectiveness of the JCP in reducing use of the MHA specifically for Black Caribbean and Black African service users (combined). Qualitative investigations with staff and service users will explore the acceptability of the JCPs.

          Discussion

          JCPs offer a potential solution to the rise of compulsory treatment for individuals with psychotic disorders and, if shown to be effective in this trial, they are likely to be of interest to mental health service providers worldwide.

          Trial registration

          Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11501328

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A polydiagnostic application of operational criteria in studies of psychotic illness. Development and reliability of the OPCRIT system.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A practical guide for calculating indirect costs of disease.

            There may be some discussion about whether indirect costs should be taken into account at all in an economic appraisal, but there is certainly considerable debate about the proper way of estimating these costs. This reviews offers a practical guide for quantifying and valuing these indirect costs of disease, both at an aggregated level of general cost of illness studies, and in an economic appraisal of specific healthcare programmes. Two methods of calculating these costs are considered: the traditional human capital approach, and the more recently developed friction cost method. The former method estimates the potential value of lost production as a result of disease, whereas the latter method intends to derive more realistic estimates of indirect costs, taking into account the degree of scarcity of labour in the economy. All necessary steps in the estimation procedure and the data required at various points will be described and discussed in detail.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effect of joint crisis plans on use of compulsory treatment in psychiatry: single blind randomised controlled trial.

              To investigate whether a form of advance agreement for people with severe mental illness can reduce the use of inpatient services and compulsory admission or treatment. Single blind randomised controlled trial, with randomisation of individual patients. The investigator was blind to allocation. Eight community mental health teams in southern England. 160 people with an operational diagnosis of psychotic illness or non-psychotic bipolar disorder who had experienced a hospital admission within the previous two years. The joint crisis plan was formulated by the patient, care coordinator, psychiatrist, and project worker and contained contact information, details of mental and physical illnesses, treatments, indicators for relapse, and advance statements of preferences for care in the event of future relapse. Admission to hospital, bed days, and use of the Mental Health Act over 15 month follow up. Use of the Mental Health Act was significantly reduced for the intervention group, 13% (10/80) of whom experienced compulsory admission or treatment compared with 27% (21/80) of the control group (risk ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.24 to 0.95, P = 0.028). As a consequence, the mean number of days of detention (days spent as an inpatient while under a section of the Mental Health Act) for the whole intervention group was 14 compared with 31 for the control group (difference 16, 0 to 36, P = 0.04). For those admitted under a section of the Mental Health Act, the number of days of detention was similar in the two groups (means 114 and 117, difference 3, -61 to 67, P = 0.98). The intervention group had fewer admissions (risk ratio 0.69, 0.45 to 1.04, P = 0.07). There was no evidence for differences in bed days (total number of days spent as an inpatient) (means 32 and 36, difference 4, -18 to 26, P = 0.15 for the whole sample; means 107 and 83, difference -24, -72 to 24, P = 0.39 for those admitted). Use of joint crisis plans reduced compulsory admissions and treatment in patients with severe mental illness. The reduction in overall admission was less. This is the first structured clinical intervention that seems to reduce compulsory admission and treatment in mental health services.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Trials
                Trials
                BioMed Central
                1745-6215
                2010
                5 November 2010
                : 11
                : 102
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, UK
                [2 ]Department of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
                [3 ]Division of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
                [4 ]Community Based Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
                [5 ]National School of Primary Care, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
                Article
                1745-6215-11-102
                10.1186/1745-6215-11-102
                2992058
                21054847
                b9e7d0cf-f436-40af-a935-517a9de0857f
                Copyright ©2010 Thornicroft et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 24 May 2010
                : 5 November 2010
                Categories
                Study Protocol

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article