Literature DB >> 19793614

Extra information about treatment is too much for the patient with psychosis.

Miriam Kennedy1, Julieanne Dornan, Emer Rutledge, Helen O'Neill, Harry G Kennedy.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Case law across jurisdictions requires ever more complete disclosure of material facts when obtaining consent to treatment. AIMS: To determine whether giving extra information impairs the mental capacity to make decisions about treatment.
METHOD: The MacCAT-T, MacCAT-FP, PANSS and GAF were administered to 88 detained forensic patients with psychosis. Two positive and two negative facts were given about each of two anti-psychotic drugs, and no treatment (twelve items). A choice was elicited. The criterion for incompetence was inability to express a choice. Two extra positive and two extra negative facts about each of the three options were given (twelve extra items) and a choice was again elicited, while repeating the MacCAT-T.
RESULTS: Giving extra information led to a decline in the total score on the MacCAT-T. Twenty one were initially unable to make a choice (24%). After additional information, 33 were incapable (37.5%, Chi-squared p<0.001). Those initially incapable had the lowest scores on all measures of functional capacity and GAF, with highest scores for symptoms. Those able to choose a treatment option had the highest levels of function and least symptoms. Those who became incapable had intermediate scores.
CONCLUSIONS: Giving extra information made an extra 15% unable to choose. Clinical judgement must be exercised concerning the amount of information disclosed. Deciding what is material to the individual is arbitrary when so few items of information can be processed. Greater use of guardianship and independent second opinions is recommended.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19793614     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.09.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Law Psychiatry        ISSN: 0160-2527


  8 in total

1.  The capacity of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder individuals to make autonomous decisions about pharmacological treatments for their illness in real life: A scoping review.

Authors:  Enric Vincens Pons; Luis Salvador-Carulla; Alfredo Calcedo-Barba; Silvia Paz; Thomas Messer; Bruno Paccardi; Scott L Zeller
Journal:  Health Sci Rep       Date:  2020-08-09

2.  Effects of group metacognitive training (MCT) on mental capacity and functioning in patients with psychosis in a secure forensic psychiatric hospital: a prospective-cohort waiting list controlled study.

Authors:  Marie Naughton; Andrea Nulty; Zareena Abidin; Mary Davoren; Sarah O'Dwyer; Harry G Kennedy
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2012-06-18

3.  Functional mental capacity, treatment as usual and time: magnitude of change in secure hospital patients with major mental illness.

Authors:  Julieanne Dornan; Miriam Kennedy; Jackie Garland; Emer Rutledge; Harry G Kennedy
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2015-10-14

4.  Prospective cohort study of the evaluation of patient benefit from the redevelopment of a complete national forensic mental health service: the Dundrum Forensic Redevelopment Evaluation Study (D-FOREST) protocol.

Authors:  Mary Davoren; Ken O'Reilly; Damian Mohan; Harry G Kennedy
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-07-22       Impact factor: 3.006

Review 5.  Positive and negative syndrome scale in forensic patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chiara Buizza; Cosmo Strozza; Giulio Sbravati; Giovanni de Girolamo; Clarissa Ferrari; Laura Iozzino; Ambra Macis; Harry G Kennedy; Valentina Candini
Journal:  Ann Gen Psychiatry       Date:  2022-09-10       Impact factor: 3.301

6.  An evaluation of functional mental capacity in forensic mental health practice: the Dundrum capacity ladders validation study.

Authors:  Gearoid Moynihan; Ken O'Reilly; Jane O'Connor; Harry G Kennedy
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 3.630

Review 7.  Advice-taking as a bridge between decision neuroscience and mental capacity.

Authors:  Elisa van der Plas; Anthony S David; Stephen M Fleming
Journal:  Int J Law Psychiatry       Date:  2019-11-26

8.  A tool to evaluate proportionality and necessity in the use of restrictive practices in forensic mental health settings: the DRILL tool (Dundrum restriction, intrusion and liberty ladders).

Authors:  Harry G Kennedy; Ronan Mullaney; Paul McKenna; John Thompson; David Timmons; Pauline Gill; Owen P O'Sullivan; Paul Braham; Dearbhla Duffy; Anthony Kearns; Sally Linehan; Damian Mohan; Stephen Monks; Lisa McLoughlin; Paul O'Connell; Conor O'Neill; Brenda Wright; Ken O'Reilly; Mary Davoren
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 3.630

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.