6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Psychiatric Advance Directives Under the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities: Why Advance Instructions Should Be Able to Override Current Preferences

      other

      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

          Psychiatric advance directives (PADs) are documents by means of which mental health service users can make known their preferences regarding treatment in a future mental health crisis. Many states with explicit legal provisions for PADs have ratified the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). While important UN bodies consider PADs a useful tool to promote the autonomy of service users, we show that an authoritative interpretation of the CRPD by the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has the adverse consequence of rendering PADs ineffective in situations where they could be of most use to service users. Based on two clinical vignettes, we demonstrate that reasonable clinical recommendations can be derived from a more realistic and flexible CRPD model. Concerns remain about the accountability of support persons who give effect to PADs. A model that combines supported decision making with competence assessment is able to address these concerns.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials

          Background Obtaining informed consent is a cornerstone of biomedical research, yet participants comprehension of presented information is often low. The most effective interventions to improve understanding rates have not been identified. Purpose To systematically analyze the random controlled trials testing interventions to research informed consent process. The primary outcome of interest was quantitative rates of participant understanding; secondary outcomes were rates of information retention, satisfaction, and accrual. Interventional categories included multimedia, enhanced consent documents, extended discussions, test/feedback quizzes, and miscellaneous methods. Methods The search spanned from database inception through September 2010. It was run on Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid CINAHL, Ovid PsycInfo and Cochrane CENTRAL, ISI Web of Science and Scopus. Five reviewers working independently and in duplicate screened full abstract text to determine eligibility. We included only RCTs. 39 out of 1523 articles fulfilled review criteria (2.6%), with a total of 54 interventions. A data extraction form was created in Distiller, an online reference management system, through an iterative process. One author collected data on study design, population, demographics, intervention, and analytical technique. Results Meta-analysis was possible on 22 interventions: multimedia, enhanced form, and extended discussion categories; all 54 interventions were assessed by review. Meta-analysis of multimedia approaches was associated with a non-significant increase in understanding scores (SMD 0.30, 95% CI, -0.23 to 0.84); enhanced consent form, with significant increase (SMD 1.73, 95% CI, 0.99 to 2.47); and extended discussion, with significant increase (SMD 0.53, 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.84). By review, 31% of multimedia interventions showed significant improvement in understanding; 41% for enhanced consent form; 50% for extended discussion; 33% for test/feedback; and 29% for miscellaneous.Multiple sources of variation existed between included studies: control processes, the presence of a human proctor, real vs. simulated protocol, and assessment formats. Conclusions Enhanced consent forms and extended discussions were most effective in improving participant understanding. Interventions of all categories had no negative impact on participant satisfaction or study accrual. Identification of best practices for studies of informed consent interventions would aid future systematic comparisons.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Reversing hard won victories in the name of human rights: a critique of the General Comment on Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

            The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is a major milestone in safeguarding the rights of persons with disabilities. However, the General Comment on Article 12 of the CRPD threatens to undermine critical rights for persons with mental disabilities, including the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health, access to justice, the right to liberty, and the right to life. Stigma and discrimination might also increase. Much hinges on the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities' view that all persons have legal capacity at all times irrespective of mental status, and hence involuntary admission and treatment, substitute decision-making, and diversion from the criminal justice system are deemed indefensible. The General Comment requires urgent consideration with the full participation of practitioners and a broad range of user and family groups.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prevalence of mental incapacity in medical inpatients and associated risk factors: cross-sectional study.

              Although mental incapacity is becoming increasingly important in clinical practice, little information is available on its frequency in medical inpatients. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of mental incapacity in acutely admitted medical inpatients; to determine the frequency that medical teams recognised patients who did not have mental capacity; and to identify factors associated with mental incapacity. Over an 18-month period, we recruited 302 consecutive acute medical inpatients. Participants were assessed with the MacArthur competence tool for treatment and by clinical interview. Cognitive impairment was measured by the mini-mental state examination. 72 (24%) patients were severely cognitively impaired, unconscious, or unable to express a choice and were automatically assigned to the incapacity group. 71 (24%) refused to participate or could not speak English. Thus, 159 patients were interviewed. Of these, 31% (95% CI 24-38) were judged not to have mental capacity. For the total sample (n=302), we estimated that at least 40% did not have mental capacity. Clinical teams rarely identified patients who did not have mental capacity: of 50 patients interviewed, 12 (24%) were rated as lacking capacity. Factors associated with mental incapacity were increasing age and cognitive impairment. Mental incapacity is common in acutely ill medical inpatients, and clinicians tend not to recognise it. Screening methods for cognitive impairment could be useful in detecting those with doubtful capacity to consent.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychiatry
                Front Psychiatry
                Front. Psychiatry
                Frontiers in Psychiatry
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-0640
                11 September 2019
                2019
                : 10
                : 631
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Institute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum , Bochum, Germany
                [2] 2Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Preventive Medicine, LWL University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum , Bochum, Germany
                Author notes

                Edited by: Christian Huber, University Psychiatric Clinic Basel, Switzerland

                Reviewed by: Piers Michael Gooding, The University of Melbourne, Australia; George Szmukler, King’s College London, United Kingdom

                *Correspondence: Matthé Scholten, matthe.scholten@ 123456rub.de

                This article was submitted to Public Mental Health, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry

                †ORCID: Matthé Scholten, orcid.org/0000-0001-8000-8974; Astrid Gieselmann, orcid.org/0000-0002-2098-3054; Jakov Gather, orcid.org/0000-0003-1681-7472

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00631
                6749547
                31572233
                e2e6a24e-ad59-4314-a433-102966183c9d
                Copyright © 2019 Scholten, Gieselmann, Gather and Vollmann

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 17 May 2019
                : 05 August 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 61, Pages: 13, Words: 10424
                Funding
                Funded by: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 10.13039/501100002347
                Categories
                Psychiatry
                Policy and Practice Reviews

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                psychiatric advance directives,advance statements,united nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities,substitute decision making,supported decision making,informed consent,competence,mental capacity

                Comments

                Comment on this article