<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nina Camilla Wergeland</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Åshild Fause</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Astrid Karine Weber</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anett Beatrix Osnes Fause</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Capacity-based legislation in Norway has so far scarcely infuenced the daily life and responsibilities of patients’ carers: a qualitative study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BMC Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Capacity-based legislation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carer</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community Treatment Order</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Family-carer</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Patient autonomy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Norwegian mental health act</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">02/2023</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://hdl.handle.net/10037/30648</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Background - When capacity-based mental health legislation was introduced in Norway in 2017, there was concern about the consequences of change in the law for patients&amp;rsquo;carer whose community treatment order was revoked as a result of being assessed as having capacity to consent. The concern was that the lack of a community treatment order would increase carers&amp;rsquo; responsibilities in an already challenging life situation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The aim of this study is to explore carers&amp;rsquo; experiences of how their responsibility and daily life were affected after the patient&amp;rsquo;s community treatment order was revoked based on capacity to consent.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Method - We conducted individual in-depth interviews from September 2019 to March 2020 with seven carers of patients whose community treatment order was revoked following assessment of capacity to consent, based on the change in the legislation. The transcripts were analysed with inspiration from reflexive thematic analysis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Results - The participants had little knowledge about the amended legislation, and three out of seven did not know about the change at the time of the interview. Their responsibility and daily life were as before, but they felt that the patient was more content, without relating this to the change in the law. They had found that coercion was necessary in certain situations, which made them worry whether the new legislation would make it more difficult to use coercion.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Conclusion - The participating carers had little or no knowledge of the change in the law. They were involved in the patient&amp;rsquo;s everyday life as before. The concerns prior to the change about a worse situation for carers had not affected them. On the contrary, they found that their family member was more satisfied with life and the care and treatment provided. This may suggest that the intention of the legislation to reduce coercion and increase autonomy was fulfilled for these patients, without resulting in any significant change in carers&amp;rsquo; lives and responsibilities.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal article</style></work-type></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Marius Storvik</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Thomas Hansen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangshjemler kan føre til mer tvang</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangshjemler kan føre til mer tvang</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.dagensmedisin.no/tvangshjemler-kan-fore-til-mer-tvang/538388</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">dagensmedisin.no</style></publisher><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;En praksis med bruk av tepper, bandasjer, borrelåsstropper eller lignende for å sikre pasienter som motsetter seg under transport, kan være svært inngripende &amp;ndash; og gir grunn til bekymring.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tidsskriftsartikkel</style></work-type></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Georg Høyer</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Olav Nyttingnes</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jorun Rugkåsa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ekaterina Sharashova</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tone Breines Simonsen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anne Høye</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Impact of introducing capacity-based mental health legislation on the use of community treatment orders in Norway: case registry study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BJPsych Open</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">community treatment orders</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CTO</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Effekt</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">impact</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">legislation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">lov</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">lovendring</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvungent vern uten døgnopphold</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2022</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">01/2022</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bjpsych-open/article/impact-of-introducing-capacitybased-mental-health-legislation-on-the-use-of-community-treatment-orders-in-norway-case-registry-study/8C1302C4705F3887004051947463A7F6</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Background&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In 2017, a capacity-based criterion was added to the Norwegian Mental Health Act, stating that those with capacity to consent to treatment cannot be subjected to involuntary care unless there is risk to themselves or others. This was expected to reduce incidence and prevalence rates, and the duration of episodes of involuntary care, in particular regarding community treatment orders (CTOs).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aims&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The aim was to investigate whether the capacity-based criterion had the expected impact on the use of CTOs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Method&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This retrospective case register study included two catchment areas serving 16% of the Norwegian population (aged &amp;ge;18). In total, 760 patients subject to 921 CTOs between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2019 were included to compare the use of CTOs 2 years before and 2 years after the legal reform.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Results&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;CTO incidence rates and duration did not change after the reform, whereas prevalence rates were significantly reduced. This was explained by a sharp increase in termination of CTOs in the year of the reform, after which it reduced and settled on a slightly higher leven than before the reform. We found an unexpected significant increase in the use of involuntary treatment orders for patients on CTOs after the reform.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Conclusions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The expected impact on CTO use of introducing a capacity-based criterion in the Norwegian Mental Health Act was not confirmed by our study. Given the existing challenges related to defining and assessing decision-making capacity, studies examining the validity of capacity assessments and their impact on the use of coercion in clinical practice are urgently needed.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tud</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nina Camilla Wergeland</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Åshild Fause</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Astrid Karine Weber</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anett Beatrix Osnes Fause</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Increased autonomy with capacity‑based mental health legislation in Norway: a qualitative study of patient experiences of having come off a community treatment order</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BMC Health Services Research (Open Access)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Autonomi</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">lov</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">lovendring</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pasientopplevelse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Samtykke</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Samtykkekompetanse</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2022</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">04/2022</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8987267/</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">7</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;Capacity-based mental health legislation was introduced in Norway on 1 September 2017. The aim was to increase the autonomy of patients with severe mental illness and to bring mental health care in line with human rights. The aim of this study is to explore patient experiences of how far the new legislation has enabled them to be involved in decisions on their treatment after they were assessed as capable of giving consent and had their community treatment order (CTO) revoked due to the change in the legislation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;Individual in-depth interviews were conducted from September 2019 to March 2020 with twelve people with experience as CTO patients. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis inspired by hermeneutics.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;Almost all interviewees were receiving the same health care over two years after their CTO was terminated. Following the new legislation, they found it easier to be involved in treatment decisions when off a CTO than they had done in periods without a CTO before the amendment. Being assessed as having capacity to consent had enhanced their autonomy, their dialogues and their feeling of being respected in encounters with health care personnel. However, several participants felt insecure in such encounters and some still felt passive and lacking in initiative due to their previous experiences of coercion. They were worried about becoming acutely ill and again being subjected to involuntary treatment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;The introduction of capacity-based mental health legislation seems to have fulfilled the intention that treatment and care should, as far as possible, be provided in accordance with patients&amp;#39; wishes. Systematic assessment of capacity to consent seems to increase the focus on patients&amp;#39; condition, level of functioning and opinions in care and treatment. Stricter requirements for health care providers to find solutions in cooperation with patients seem to lead to new forms of collaboration between patients and health care personnel, where patients have become more active participants in their own treatment and receive help to make more informed choices.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Keywords:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;Autonomy; Capacity to consent; Coercion; Community treatment order; Outpatient commitment; Patient experiences; Self-determination; The Mental Health Care Act.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">22</style></issue><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">erfaringsbaserte</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ekaterina Sharashova</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jorun Rugkåsa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Olav Nyttingnes</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tore Buer Christensen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ann-Torunn Andersen Austegard</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Løvsletten</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bjørn Lau</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Georg Høyer</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Out-patient commitment order use in Norway: incidence and prevalence rates, duration and use of mental health services from the Norwegian Outpatient Commitment Study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BJPsych Open</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community Treatment Order</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">OCT</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Outpatient commitment</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">09/2019</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160252718301900</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;h3 id=&quot;sec_a1title&quot;&gt;Background&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;__p1&quot;&gt;Norway authorised out-patient commitment in 1961, but there is a lack of representative and complete data on the use of out-patient commitment orders.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 id=&quot;sec_a2title&quot;&gt;Aims&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;__p2&quot;&gt;To establish the incidence and prevalence rates on the use of out-patient commitment in Norway, and how these vary across service areas. Further, to study variations in out-patient commitment across service areas, and use of in-patient services before and after implementation of out-patient commitment orders. Finally, to identify determinants for the duration of out-patient commitment orders and time to readmission.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 id=&quot;sec_a3title&quot;&gt;Method&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;__p3&quot;&gt;Retrospective case register study based on medical files of all patients with an out-patient commitment order in 2008&amp;ndash;2012 in six catchment areas in Norway, covering one-third of the Norwegian population aged 18 years or more. For a subsample of patients, we recorded use of in-patient care 3 years before and after their first-ever out-patient commitment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 id=&quot;sec_a4title&quot;&gt;Results&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;__p4&quot;&gt;Annual incidence varied between 20.7 and 28.4, and prevalence between 36.5 and 48.9, per 100 000 population aged 18 years or above. Rates differed significantly between catchment areas. Mean out-patient commitment duration was 727 days (s.d. = 889). Use of in-patient care decreased significantly in the 3 years after out-patient commitment compared with the 3 years before. Use of antipsychotic medication through the whole out-patient commitment period and fewer in-patient episodes in the 3 years before out-patient commitment predicted longer time to readmission.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 id=&quot;sec_a5title&quot;&gt;Conclusions&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;__p5&quot;&gt;Mechanisms behind the pronounced variations in use of out-patient commitment between sites call for further studies. Use of in-patient care was significantly reduced in the 3 years after a first-ever out-patient commitment order was made.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 id=&quot;sec_a6title&quot;&gt;Declaration of interest&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;__p6&quot;&gt;None.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sep; 5(5): e75</style></issue><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jorun Rugkåsa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Olav Nyttingnes</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tone Breines Simonsen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jūratė Šaltytė Benth</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bjørn Lau</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Løvsletteng</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tore Buer Christensen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ann-Torunn Andersen Austegard</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Georg Høyer</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The use of outpatient commitment in Norway: Who are the patients and what does it involve?</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community psychiatry</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community Treatment Order</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Outpatient commitment</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252718301900</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;div&gt;Purpose&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Despite one of the longest histories of using Outpatient Commitment (OC), little is known about the use in the Norwegian context. Reporting from the Norwegian Outpatient Commitment Study, this article aims to: establish the profile of the OC population in Norway; ascertain the legal justification for the use of OC and what OC involves for patients; investigate possible associations between selected patient and service characteristics and duration of OC, and; explore potential differences based on gender or rurality.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Methods&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;A retrospective multi-site study, extracting data from the medical records of all patients on OC in six large regional hospitals in 2008&amp;ndash;12, with detailed investigation over 36 months of the subsample of patients on first ever OC-order in 2008&amp;ndash;09. We use descriptive statistics to establish the profile of the OC population and the legal justification for and the content of OC, and logistic regression to examine factors associated with duration of OC over 36 months.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Results&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;1414 patients were on OC over the 5 years, and 274 had their first OC in 2008&amp;ndash;09. The sample included more men than woman, and three-quarters were diagnosed with schizophrenia. They had long service histories, including involuntary admissions. The legal justification for all OC-orders was the need for treatment, and 18% were additionally justified by dangerousness. The option to initiate OC directly from the community was not used in any of the 274 first ever OC-orders. While 98% of patients were prescribed psychotropic medication, under half had an Involuntary Treatment Order, which under the Norwegian OC regime is required in addition to the OC-order to oblige patients to accept treatment (usually medication). 60% of patients had &amp;ge;2 clinical contacts monthly. There were some gender differences in descriptive analyses with men generally being worse off, but no clear pattern in terms of rurality. Patients in the sample had been on OC between one week and 20 years. The median duration of OC over 36 months was 365 days. Three factors contributed to longer duration: the use of the dangerousness criterion; a diagnosis of schizophrenia disorder, and; considerable problems with substance abuse.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Conclusion&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;The characteristics of the OC population in Norway are very similar to that reported in other jurisdictions. Medication seems to be the central focus of OC, yet additional Involuntary Treatment Orders are imposed for less than half of patients. While all OC-orders were justified by the need to ensure treatment, risk seems to be a concern for a subgroup of patients who are kept on for longer. How the 2017 amendment to the mental health act, which precludes compulsion for competent patients unless danger is present, will affect OC use, remains to be seen. Further studies should specifically focus on variation in the use of OC, including at the level of individual clinicians.&lt;/div&gt;</style></abstract><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">When coercion moves into your home. A study of outpatient commitment in Northern Norway</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Helsevitenskapelig fakultet</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">08.12.2016</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://hdl.handle.net/10037/10051</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Universitetet i Tromsø</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tromsø, Norge</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PhD</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Georg Høyer</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Geir F Lorem</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">‘When coercion moves into your home’ – a qualitative study of patient experiences with outpatient commitment in Norway</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Health &amp; Social Care in the Community</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hsc.12107/full</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></label></record></records></xml>