A Register Study of Effects Following Local Variation in Rates of Involuntary Care
Do Low Rates of Coercion in Catchment Areas Predict Negative Effects for Persons With Severe Mental Disorders? A Register Study From Norway 2015-2017. Part of Reducing Coercion in Norway (ReCoN)
Involuntary mental health care is permitted because it is believed to make people with severe mental disorders (SMD) better and prevent them from getting worse or even dying In this study we will investigate whether low levels of coercion in an area is connected with poorer outcomes in Norway. It can be assumed that too little involuntary care might lead to the opposite outcomes to those intended by the Norwegian Mental Health Act.
The same law applies all over Norway, but the rate of involuntary care varies: there is up to five-fold difference between the catchment areas of the 69 Community Mental Health Centers. The investigators will estimate rates of involuntary care and adjust for age, sex, urbanity and area deprivation. The data source is the Norwegian Patients Registry, and all patients in treatment for a severe mental disorder in 2015 and their use of mental health care until 2018 will be followed.
Model 1 follows all patients who were treated for a severe mental disorder in 2015. The model will test whether the rates of involuntary care in the area they live can predict the length of time to death.
Model 2 follows patients with treatment for severe mental disorders that had no episode of voluntary care in 2015. The model will test whether the rate of involuntary care in their area predicts their use of mental health inpatient care in 2016 and 2017.
Model 3 tests how long time patients with severe mental disorders that received only voluntary care in 2015 remain without a period of involuntary care in 2016-17, as a function of the rate of involuntary care in their area.
Model 4 estimates changing the total number of patients with severe mental disorders in the catchment area in 2016-17 as a function of time and the rate of involuntary in 2015.
Model 5 tests whether suicide rates for a catchment area varies as a function of its rate of involuntary care. Because suicides are rare, we will observe the variables over longer time periods, using involuntary care rates from 2015 to 2018 and suicide rates for 2015-2019.
The study was evaluated by the Research Ethics Committee (ref 2018/795), who approved use of registry data, and by the Privacy Ombudsman at Akershus University Hospital (ref 2018-090).
研究概览
地位
条件
详细说明
Involuntary mental health care is permitted because it is believed to make people with severe mental disorders (SMD) better and prevent them from getting worse or even dying. This study concerns whether low levels of coercion in an area is connected with poorer outcomes in Norway. Too little involuntary care could be expected to lead to the opposite outcomes to those intended by the Norwegian Mental Health Act.
The same law applies all over Norway, but the rate of involuntary care varies: there is an up to five-fold difference between the catchment areas of the 69 Community Mental Health Centers (CMHC).
This study will use national register data to test whether areas with low rates of involuntary care shows signs of failing to achieve the patient benefits of involuntary care as intended by the Norwegian Mental Health Act.
Data on involuntary care will be retieved from the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR) and combined with data on the general population and demographics from Statistics Norway, to study the hypothesized negative consequences of low rates of involuntary care. All of Norway's 21 Health Trusts and their 69 Community Mental Health Centers that provide specialist services are required to submit to NPR on an annual basis complete data of all service use from their hospitals' electronic patient administrative and clinical systems. The NPR conducts extensive data-quality checks, and publishes completeness data for all variables. The registry implemented a unique patient identifier in 2008, so that a patient's care can be followed across time. From the NPR database, information on all specialist mental health treatment activity for patients with set criteria (in our case diagnosis F20-31 and legal status) during a given time period (here 2015-18) can be extracted.
Both involuntary admissions and outpatient compulsion in the form of community treatment orders (CTO) are envisaged to contribute to the aims of the Mental Health Act, such as protection against harm, improvement, restoration of health, and recovery or cure for the patient. The variable of interest is low use of the combination of these two forms of involuntary care. To our knowledge, there is no established way to calculate a combined measure of inpatient and outpatient involuntary care, and it is not generally established how one form of involuntary care is associated with the other. In Norway, 31% of involuntary admissions continued as a CTO in 2018, and although permitted, CTOs are almost never initiated when the patient lives at home. When a patient is under involuntary admissions or a CTO, the care system has substantial influence and control over their treatment, and medication is a particular focus. Regardless of the form of involuntary care, control over treatment can be continued according to necessity criteria in the law in order to prevent deterioration. For these reasons, the rate of persons affected by involuntary admission and/or CTO per 100 000 capita will be used as an indicator of use of involuntary care in the catchment area and hence, the main covariate.
The age span will be patients from 18 to 65, so that the increasing frequency of involuntary care due to lack of capacity due to dementia towards the end of life will not impact the results. The investigators will control for age and sex by indirect standardization, based on Statistics Norway's tables for population in municipalities and city districts.
The investigators will test whether the living condition index and/or urbanity of the municipality (perhaps merged to fewer categories than five) predict rates of involuntary care. A classification of all municipalities into five degrees of urbanity from a previous study will be used. Statistics Norway published an index of living conditions in Norwegian municipalities and City districts in 2000 and 2008, which has not been continued after 2008. This index combines the level or frequency of a variety of social benefit payments, unemployment, education level and lethality, and should be sufficiently up to date. If urbanity or living condition predicts rates of involuntary care, it will be controlled for by estimating a suitable linear regression model. A hierarchical model adjusting for nesting of municipalities within CMHCs and CMHCs within health trusts will be considered, but this adjustment may be reduced based on intraclass correlations. Then the ratio between expected and observed use of involuntary care will be the main covariate, and will reflect the rate of involuntary care per capita, controlled for age, sex and urbanity and deprivation in each catchment area. Each patient in the dataset will be assigned the value of this covariate corresponding to their area of residence in 2015.
The first group of models is assess associations between the main covariate measured in the index year and survival or change in outcome variables in the following 2 years for the patients included.
Model 1. Are there more deaths among SMD patients from areas with low levels of involuntary care?
The main covariate is rate of involuntary care in 69 areas in 2015, controlled for age, sex, urbanity and deprivation. The unit of analysis is the individual patient with a care episode and a registered SMD diagnosis in 2015. Outcome variable is time to death from the quarter in 2015 with a registered event with a SMD-diagnosis, observed through 2018. The unit of analysis is the individual SMD patient. The statistical method is survival analysis with adjustment for age and sex and adjustment for random effects.
Model 2. Is there increased use of inpatient care for voluntary SMD-patients from areas with low levels of involuntary care?
The main covariate is rate of involuntary mental health care in 69 areas in 2015, controlled for age, sex, urbanity and deprivation. The unit of analyses is the individual SMD-patient with 'voluntary care only' in 2015. The outcome variable is change in mental health inpatient days in the next two years for the included patients. The statistical method is a linear mixed model with random effects for CMHC.
Model 3. Is there decreased time to next episode of involuntary care for voluntary SMD-patients from in areas with low levels of involuntary care? The main covariate is rate of involuntary mental health care in the 69 areas in 2015, controlled for age, sex, urbanity and deprivation. The unit of analyses is the individual SMD-patient with 'voluntary care only' in 2015. Outcome variable are time to a treatment episode with involuntary care observed through 2016 and 2017. The statistical method is survival analysis with death as competing risk with random effects for catchment area.
Model 4 and 5 are ecological models of the catchment areas.
Model 4. Are low levels of involuntary care in a catchment area followed by more SMD patients in the area? The main covariate is rate of involuntary mental health care in the 69 areas in 2015, controlled for age, sex, urbanity and deprivation. The outcome variable is the annual number of patients with SMD in 2016 and 2017. The unit of analysis is the catchment area (N=69). The statistical method is linear regression model with time, main covariate and interaction between the two as independent variables.
Model 5. Is low level of involuntary care in an area related to more suicides?
The main covariate is rate of involuntary care in 2015-2018 in the 69 areas, controlled for age, sex, urbanity and deprivation. The outcome variable is the standardized rate of suicides in the area's population regardless of patient status, from 2015 through 2019. The unit of analysis is the 69 catchment areas. Due to low incidence of the outcome, merging of some areas will be considered. The statistical method is correlation analysis.
Dissemination: Study results will be published study international peer-reviewed scientific journals. The number of papers necessary to disseminate results depends of the complexity of results and their interpretation.
研究类型
注册 (实际的)
参与标准
资格标准
适合学习的年龄
接受健康志愿者
有资格学习的性别
取样方法
研究人群
描述
Inclusion Criteria:
- The person received treatment for ICD-10 codes F20-31 in Norwegian health trusts 2015
Exclusion Criteria:
- Persons without permanent address in Norway (tourists)
- For models 2 and 3, patients receiving involuntary mental health care in 2015 is excluded
学习计划
研究是如何设计的?
设计细节
研究衡量的是什么?
主要结果指标
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
---|---|---|
Time to death
大体时间:2015-2017
|
Time to death for patients with a severe mental disorder in 2015, as a function of the rate of involuntary care for the patient's area of residence in 2015
|
2015-2017
|
Mental health inpatient days
大体时间:2015-2017
|
Time trends in mental health inpatient days from 2015-2017 for patients with a severe mental disorder but no involuntary care in 2015, as a function of the rate of involuntary care for the patient's area of residence in 2015
|
2015-2017
|
Episode of involuntary care
大体时间:2015-2017
|
Time to an episode of involuntary care for patients with a severe mental disorder and no involuntary care in 2015, as a function of the rate of involuntary care for the patient's area of residence in 2015
|
2015-2017
|
Number of patients with severe mental disorders
大体时间:2015-2017
|
Time trends in the rate of severe mental disorders in 69 catchment areas as a function of their rates of involuntary care in 2015-2018
|
2015-2017
|
Number of suicides
大体时间:2015-2019
|
Standardized rate of suicides in 60 catchment areas in 2015-2019, as a function of rates of involuntary care in 2015-2018
|
2015-2019
|
合作者和调查者
调查人员
- 首席研究员:Jorun Rugkåsa, PhD、University Hospital, Akershus
研究记录日期
研究主要日期
学习开始 (实际的)
初级完成 (实际的)
研究完成 (实际的)
研究注册日期
首次提交
首先提交符合 QC 标准的
首次发布 (实际的)
研究记录更新
最后更新发布 (实际的)
上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新
最后验证
更多信息
与本研究相关的术语
其他相关的 MeSH 术语
其他研究编号
- 2018/795(REK)
- 2018-090 (其他标识符:Akershus University Hospital Privacy Ombudsman)
计划个人参与者数据 (IPD)
计划共享个人参与者数据 (IPD)?
药物和器械信息、研究文件
研究美国 FDA 监管的药品
研究美国 FDA 监管的设备产品
此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.
躁郁症的临床试验
-
Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron Research InstituteInstituto de Salud Carlos III完全的
-
Dren BioNovotech招聘中侵袭性 NK 细胞白血病 | 肝脾T细胞淋巴瘤 | 肠病相关的T细胞淋巴瘤 | 皮下脂膜炎样 T 细胞淋巴瘤 | 单形性趋上皮性肠 T 细胞淋巴瘤 | LGLL - 大颗粒淋巴细胞白血病 | 原发性皮肤 T 细胞淋巴瘤 - 类别 | 原发性皮肤 CD8 阳性侵袭性嗜表皮 T 细胞淋巴瘤 | 系统性 EBV1 T 细胞淋巴瘤,如果 CD8 阳性 | Hydroa Vacciniforme-Like Lymphoproliferative Disorder | 结外 NK/T 细胞淋巴瘤,鼻型 | 胃肠道惰性慢性淋巴增生性疾病 (CLPD)(CD8+ 或 NK 衍生) | 上面未列出的其他 CD8+/NK 细胞驱动的淋巴瘤美国, 澳大利亚, 法国, 西班牙
-
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center招聘中蕈样肉芽肿 | 塞扎里综合症 | 血管免疫母细胞性T细胞淋巴瘤 | 肝脾T细胞淋巴瘤 | 间变性大细胞淋巴瘤,ALK 阳性 | 结外 NK/T 细胞淋巴瘤,鼻型 | T细胞淋巴瘤 | 未特指的外周 T 细胞淋巴瘤 | 原发性皮肤间变性大细胞淋巴瘤 | 皮下脂膜炎样 T 细胞淋巴瘤 | 肠病相关的T细胞淋巴瘤 | 间变性大细胞淋巴瘤,ALK 阴性 | 单形性趋上皮性肠 T 细胞淋巴瘤 | T 细胞幼淋巴细胞白血病 | T 细胞大颗粒淋巴细胞白血病 | 原发性皮肤 CD8 阳性侵袭性嗜表皮 T 细胞淋巴瘤 | Hydroa Vacciniforme-Like Lymphoproliferative Disorder | NK细胞淋巴瘤 | 侵袭性 NK 细胞白血病 | 成人 T 细胞白血病/淋巴瘤 及其他条件美国