Objective: This study examined whether patients' perception of recovery differed for those receiving treatment under a compulsory treatment order (CTO) compared to those who were not.
Method: A total of 86 participants with schizophrenia/schizo-affective disorder were interviewed about their views on recovery, and their clinical files were examined to ascertain if they were under a CTO at time of interview.
Results: No association between being under a CTO and recovery beliefs was found. Irrespective of whether patients were under a CTO or not, the majority of participants (82%) reported that they thought recovery is possible and half of the participants (51%) reported that they were in recovery.
Conclusion: The present study found no evidence that being under a CTO was related to additional pessimistic views about recovery or being recovered. Participants under a CTO were no more or less likely to report that recovery was possible, and that they were recovered, as participants who were not under a CTO.
JaworowskiSGunevaR. Community treatment orders: clinical versus administrative role. Australasian Psychiatry1999; 7: 341.
2.
MilneDO'BrienAMcKennaB. Community treatment orders and competence to consent. Australasian Psychiatry2009; 17: 273–278.
3.
BrophyLMcDermottF. What's driving involuntary treatment in the community? The social, policy, legal and ethical context. Australasian Psychiatry2003; 11: 84–88.
4.
McIvorR. The community treatment order: clinical and ethical issues. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry1998; 32: 223–228.
5.
PatelG. Community treatment orders in Victoria: a clinico-ethical perspective. Australasian Psychiatry2008; 16: 340–343.
6.
KallapiranKSankaranarayananALewinT. A pilot investigation of the relationship between community treatment orders and hospitalization rates. Australasian Psychiatry2010; 18: 503–505.
7.
JaworowskiSGunevaR. Integrating community treatment orders into best clinical practice. Australasian Psychiatry2000; 8: 59–62.
8.
SteadmanHJGounisKDennisDHopperKRocheBSwartzMRobbinsPC. Assessing the New York City involuntary outpatient commitment pilot program. Psychiatric Services2001; 52: 330–336.
9.
SwartzMSSwansonJWWagnerHRBurnsBJHidayVABorumR. Can involuntary outpatient commitment reduce hospital recidivism? Findings from a randomized trial with severely mentally ill individuals. American Journal of Psychiatry1999; 156: 1968–1975.
10.
GibbsADawsonJAnsleyCMullenR. How patients in New Zealand view community treatment orders. Journal of Mental Health2005; 14: 357–368.
11.
MullenRDawsonJGibbsA. Dilemmas for clinicians in use of community treatment orders. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry2006; 29: 535–550.
12.
BrughaTSBebbingtonPEJenkinsR. Cross validation of a general population survey diagnostic interview: a comparison of CIS-R with SCAN ICD-10 diagnostic categories. Psychological Medicine1999; 29: 1029–1042.
13.
LewisGPelosiAArayaRDunnG. Measuring psychiatric disorder in the community: a standardised assessment for use by lay interviewers. Psychological Medicine1992; 22: 465–486.
14.
KayS. Positive–negative symptom assessment in schizophrenia: psychometric issues and scale comparison. Psychiatric Quarterly1990; 61: 163–178.
15.
McKibbinCPattersonTLJesteDV. Assessing disability in older patients with schizophrenia: results from the WHODAS-II. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease2004; 192: 405–413.
16.
LibermanRPKopelowiczAK. Recovery from schizophrenia: a concept in search of research. Psychiatric Services2005; 56: 735–742.
17.
BellackAS. Scientific and consumer models of recovery in schizophrenia: concordance, contrasts and implications. Schizophrenia Bulletin2006; 32: 432–442.
