Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28274298›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2018

Treatment decision-making capacity in non-consensual psychiatric treatment: a multicentre study.

G Mandarelli, F Carabellese, G Parmigiani, F Bernardini, L Pauselli, R Quartesan, R Catanesi, S Ferracuti

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

G MandarelliDepartment of Neurology and Psychiatry,University of Rome 'Sapienza',viale dell'Università 30,00185 Rome,Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4887-5108
F CarabelleseSection of Criminology and Forensic Psychiatry,University of Bari 'Aldo Moro',Piazza Giulio Cesare,70124,Bari,Italy.
G ParmigianiDepartment of Neurology and Psychiatry,University of Rome 'Sapienza',viale dell'Università 30,00185 Rome,Italy.
F BernardiniSchool of Psychiatry,University of Perugia,06156 Perugia,Italy.
L PauselliSchool of Psychiatry,University of Perugia,06156 Perugia,Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7680-5532
R QuartesanSchool of Psychiatry,University of Perugia,06156 Perugia,Italy.
R CatanesiSection of Criminology and Forensic Psychiatry,University of Bari 'Aldo Moro',Piazza Giulio Cesare,70124,Bari,Italy.
S FerracutiDepartment of Neurology and Psychiatry,University of Rome 'Sapienza',viale dell'Università 30,00185 Rome,Italy.
Sapienza University of Rome · ITUniversity of Perugia · ITUniversity of Bari Aldo Moro · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo evaluate treatment decision-making capacity (DMC) to consent to psychiatric treatment in involuntarily committed patients and to further investigate possible associations with clinical and socio-demographic characteristics of patients.

methods131 involuntarily hospitalised patients were recruited in three university hospitals. Mental capacity to consent to treatment was measured with the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T); psychiatric symptoms severity (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, BPRS-E) and cognitive functioning (Mini Mental State Examination, MMSE) were also assessed.

resultsMental capacity ratings for the 131 involuntarily hospitalised patients showed that patients affected by bipolar disorders (BD) scored generally better than those affected by schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) in MacCAT-T appreciation (p < 0.05) and reasoning (p < 0.01). Positive symptoms were associated with poorer capacity to appreciate (r = -0.24; p < 0.01) and reason (r = -0.27; p < 0.01) about one's own treatment. Negative symptoms were associated with poorer understanding of treatment (r = -0.23; p < 0.01). Poorer cognitive functioning, as measured by MMSE, negatively affected MacCAT-T understanding in patients affected by SSD, but not in those affected by BD (SSD r = 0.37; p < 0.01; BD r = -0.01; p = 0.9). Poorer MacCAT-T reasoning was associated with more manic symptoms in the BD group of patients but not in the SSD group (BD r = -0.32; p < 0.05; SSD r = 0.03; p = 0.8). Twenty-two per cent (n = 29) of the 131 recruited patients showed high treatment DMC as defined by having scored higher than 75% of understanding, appreciating and reasoning MacCAT-T subscales maximum sores and 2 at expressing a choice. The remaining involuntarily hospitalised patients where considered to have low treatment DMC. Chi-squared disclosed that 32% of BD patients had high treatment DMC compared with 9% of SSD patients (p < 0.001).

conclusionsTreatment DMC can be routinely assessed in non-consensual psychiatric settings by the MacCAT-T, as is the case of other clinical variables. Such approach can lead to the identification of patients with high treatment DMC, thus drawing attention to possible dichotomy between legal and clinical status.

Indexed as

Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric DisordersDecision MakingMental CompetencyAdultFemaleHospitalizationHumansInformed ConsentInpatientsItalyMalePatient ParticipationPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesSeverity of Illness IndexInformed consentinvoluntary hospitalisationmental capacitysevere mental illness

Identifiers

PMID28274298
PMCPMC6999012
OpenAlexW2594796553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.