<?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%">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>32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Løvsletten</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Management of patients with outpatient commitment in the mental health services</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Det medisinske fakultet, UiO</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psykisk helsevern</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Samtykke</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</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%">2022</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://bibsys-almaprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=BIBSYS_ILS71646654240002201&amp;context=L&amp;vid=UIO&amp;lang=no_NO&amp;search_scope=default_scope&amp;adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&amp;tab=default_tab&amp;query=any,contains,Management%20of%20pati</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">UiO</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oslo</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Philosophiae Doctor (PhD)</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">113</style></pages><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">978-82-348-0011-5</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Background&lt;br /&gt;This PhD project has examined how outpatient commitment (OC) decisions work. In Norway,&lt;br /&gt;the Mental Health Act provides the opportunity to use coercion in the treatment of people&lt;br /&gt;with mental disorder. Patients with OC decisions live in their own homes in the municipality,&lt;br /&gt;at the same time as they have a compulsory decision adopted by the specialist health service.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aim&lt;br /&gt;The main issue for this PhD project has been to explore how the OC scheme works from a&lt;br /&gt;mental health service perspective. The PhD project has mapped the patient group receiving&lt;br /&gt;OC decisions. In addition, it has investigated how health personnel in mental health services&lt;br /&gt;experience follow-up and interaction with patients and across service levels.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Design and methods&lt;br /&gt;This PhD project consists of three sub-studies with different issues and different research&lt;br /&gt;designs using both quantitative and qualitative methods. These three sub-studies have resulted&lt;br /&gt;in three published papers.&lt;br /&gt;Sub-study 1 collected data from electronic patient records including all patients in two&lt;br /&gt;counties in Norway. The statistical methods used in this study were descriptive analysis, with&lt;br /&gt;frequency analysis and cross-tabulation analysis. The study mapped the patient group of 139&lt;br /&gt;patients who had received an OC decision from 2008 to 2012.&lt;br /&gt;Sub-study 2 collected data using an electronic questionnaire sent to healthcare personnel in&lt;br /&gt;the mental health services, who have experience with psychosis and OC decisions in two&lt;br /&gt;counties in Norway. There were 230 people who received the questionnaire and 84 of them&lt;br /&gt;answered the form. The groups were compared using cross-analysis, correlation analysis&lt;br /&gt;(Pearson&amp;rsquo;s r) and non-parametric Wilcoxon&amp;rsquo;s test (P &amp;le;0.05). The sample consisted of various&lt;br /&gt;health personnel from both small and large municipalities, and examined which tasks they had&lt;br /&gt;in follow-up of patients and how they collaborated with the specialist health services.&lt;br /&gt;Sub-study 3 This was a qualitative study collecting data through focus group interviews with&lt;br /&gt;health personnel from the municipal health service and specialist health services. The study&lt;br /&gt;explored their experiences with collaboration between municipalities and specialist health&lt;br /&gt;care services, for patients with an OC decision. The analysis followed the steps in qualitative&lt;br /&gt;content analysis inspired by Graneheim and Lundman.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Results&lt;br /&gt;The first sub-study revealed that the patient group receiving the OC decisions constituted a&lt;br /&gt;small group of patients in mental health care who had psychotic disorders, with the majority&lt;br /&gt;having a schizophrenia disorder. Most patients had received treatment in mental health care&lt;br /&gt;for 10 years before they received their first OC decision. They received parallel mental health&lt;br /&gt;services from both specialist health services and their own home municipality. Many patients&lt;br /&gt;lacked information about an individual plan (IP) and a contact person in the medical record.&lt;br /&gt;The second sub-study found that the health personnel gave the same follow-up to all patients&lt;br /&gt;with psychosis and OC decisions. However, patients who had OC decisions received fewer&lt;br /&gt;conversations about their medication. Many among the health personnel lacked up-to-date&lt;br /&gt;knowledge of the changes in the Mental Health Act in 2017. In addition, the study disclosed&lt;br /&gt;that the health personnel had varied experience of cooperation with the specialist health&lt;br /&gt;services.&lt;br /&gt;The third sub-study explored the health personnel experiences with follow-up of patients with&lt;br /&gt;OC decisions in municipal housing associations and district psychiatric centres (DPCs). The&lt;br /&gt;study disclosed that the health personnel related that they followed up patients with OC&lt;br /&gt;decisions in a different way to other patients, and felt more responsibility towards them. Thus,&lt;br /&gt;the altered rules for consent competence have made the work with OC decisions more&lt;br /&gt;demanding.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Conclusion&lt;br /&gt;All the sub-studies revealed a lack of interaction between the service levels. The&lt;br /&gt;responsibility for coordinating the follow-up of the patients with OC decisions on a daily&lt;br /&gt;basis appears to be unclear across service levels. The contact person&amp;#39;s role and IP have not&lt;br /&gt;functioned as a collaboration tool in accordance with the intention of the Mental Health Act&lt;br /&gt;and the Patient Rights Act. When an IP is lacking, there is a lack of an absence of clear user&lt;br /&gt;participation and of a rehabilitation perspective for the patients with OC decisions. The new&lt;br /&gt;legislation in the Mental Health Act in 2017, with a requirement for consent assessment&lt;br /&gt;before an OC decision, has changed the practice and the basis for making an OC decision.&lt;br /&gt;Therefore, if an OC decision can contribute to an improved process and function as intended&lt;br /&gt;in the law, the decisions must contain more than the control of the decision. These findings&lt;br /&gt;show that the laws are not currently applied, which is ethically worrying.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sammendrag&lt;br /&gt;Bakgrunn&lt;br /&gt;Dette PhD prosjektet har utforsket hvordan ordningen med tvang uten døgnopphold (TUD)&lt;br /&gt;fungerer i Norge. I Norge gir Psykisk helsevernloven muligheten til å bruke tvang ved&lt;br /&gt;oppfølgingen av pasienter med psykisk lidelser som bor i sitt eget hjem i kommunen, samtidig&lt;br /&gt;som de har tvangsvedtak fra spesialisthelsetjenesten.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Formål&lt;br /&gt;Målet for dette PhD prosjektet har vært å utforske hvordan TUD ordningen fungerer ut i fra et&lt;br /&gt;psykisk helsetjenesteperspektiv. PhD prosjektet har kartlagt pasientgruppen med TUD vedtak,&lt;br /&gt;og undersøkt hvilken oppfølging pasientene får og hvordan samarbeidet mellom kommuner&lt;br /&gt;og spesialisthelsetjenesten fungerer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Design og metoder&lt;br /&gt;Dette PhD-prosjektet består av tre delstudier med forskjellige problemstillinger og forskjellige&lt;br /&gt;forskningsdesign og har benyttet både kvantitativ og kvalitativ metode. De tre delstudiene har&lt;br /&gt;resultert i tre publiserte artikler.&lt;br /&gt;Delstudie 1 inkluderte 139 pasienter fra to fylker i Norge med TUD vedtak. Data ble samlet&lt;br /&gt;inn fra elektroniske pasientjournaler og inkluderte alle pasienter med TUD vedtak fra 2008&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;t.o.m. 2012. Studien hadde et deskriptivt design og det ble benyttet frekvensanalyse og kryss-&lt;br /&gt;tabellanalyse.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Delstudie 2 samlet inn data ved hjelp av et elektronisk spørreskjema sendt til helsepersonell i&lt;br /&gt;kommunale psykiske helsetjeneste i to fylker i Norge, som hadde erfaring med pasienter med&lt;br /&gt;psykose og TUD vedtak. Det var 230 personer som mottok spørreskjemaet, og 84 personer&lt;br /&gt;besvarte skjemaet. Gruppene ble sammenlignet ved bruk av kryssanalyse, korrelasjonsanalyse&lt;br /&gt;(Pearson&amp;rsquo;s r) og ikke-parametrisk Wilcoxon&amp;rsquo;s test (P &amp;le;0.05). Utvalget besto av helsepersonell&lt;br /&gt;fra både små og store kommuner, og det ble undersøkt hvordan de fulgte opp pasientene i&lt;br /&gt;kommunene og hvordan de samarbeidet med spesialisthelsetjenesten.&lt;br /&gt;Delstudie 3 er en kvalitativ studie som samlet inn data gjennom fokusgruppeintervjuer med&lt;br /&gt;helsepersonell fra kommunale bofelleskap og spesialisthelsetjenesten. Studien utforsket deres&lt;br /&gt;erfaringer med samarbeid mellom kommuner og spesialisthelsetjeneste for pasienter med&lt;br /&gt;TUD vedtak. Analysen fulgte trinnene til kvalitativ innholdsanalyse etter Graneheim og&lt;br /&gt;Lundman.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Resultater&lt;br /&gt;Den første delstudien viste at pasientgruppen som har TUD vedtak, utgjør en liten&lt;br /&gt;pasientgruppe i psykisk helsevern med psykose lidelser, hvor de fleste hadde en&lt;br /&gt;schizofrenilidelse. De fleste pasientene hadde hatt oppfølging for sine psykiske&lt;br /&gt;helseproblemer i 10 år før de fikk sitt første TUD vedtak. Pasientene mottok parallelle&lt;br /&gt;psykiske helsetjenester fra både spesialisthelsetjenesten og sin egen hjemkommune. Mange&lt;br /&gt;pasienter manglet informasjon om individuell plan (IP) og hvem fra spesialisthelsetjenesten&lt;br /&gt;som var kontaktperson i pasientjournalen.&lt;br /&gt;Den andre delstudien viste at helsepersonell gir samme oppfølging til alle pasienter med&lt;br /&gt;psykotiske lidelser uansett om de hadde et TUD vedtak eller ikke. Men, pasienter med TUD&lt;br /&gt;vedtak fikk færre samtaler om medisiner. Mange blant helsepersonellet manglet oppdatert&lt;br /&gt;kunnskap om endringene i Psykisk helsevernloven fra 2017. Helsepersonellet i kommunene&lt;br /&gt;erfarte utfordringer knyttet til samarbeid mellom helsepersonell på ulike tjenestenivåer. IP ble&lt;br /&gt;sjelden brukt og fungerte bare i varierende grad som et samhandlingsverktøy.&lt;br /&gt;Den tredje delstudien har undersøkt helsepersonells erfaringer med oppfølging av pasienter&lt;br /&gt;med TUD vedtak i kommunale borettslag og distrikt psykiatriske senter (DPS). De svarte at&lt;br /&gt;de fulgte opp pasienter med TUD vedtak på en annen måte enn andre pasienter, og følte mer&lt;br /&gt;ansvar overfor dem. Lovendringen i Psykisk helsevernloven fra 2017, med krav om&lt;br /&gt;samtykkevurdering før TUD vedtak, har gjort arbeidet med TUD vedtak mer krevende.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Konklusjon&lt;br /&gt;Alle delstudiene viste manglende samhandling mellom tjenestenivåene. Informasjon om&lt;br /&gt;kontaktpersonen i spesialisthelsetjenesten manglet for mange pasienter. Ansvaret for&lt;br /&gt;koordinering av oppfølgingen av pasientene med TUD vedtak mellom tjenestenivåer ser ut til&lt;br /&gt;å være uklar, og IP fungerer ikke som et samarbeidsverktøy i samsvar med intensjonen i&lt;br /&gt;Psykisk helsevernloven og Pasientrettighetsloven. Når en IP mangler, mangler et tydelig&lt;br /&gt;brukermedvirkning og rehabiliteringsperspektiv for pasienter med TUD vedtak.&lt;br /&gt;Den nye lovendringen i Psykisk helsevernloven fra 2017, med krav om samtykkevurdering&lt;br /&gt;har endret praksis og grunnlag for å gjøre TUD vedtak.&lt;br /&gt;Hvis TUD vedtak skal bidra til bedring som loven tilsier, må TUD vedtaket inneholde mer&lt;br /&gt;enn å kontrollere vedtakene. Dette PhD prosjektet viser at noen av lovbestemmelsene ikke&lt;br /&gt;brukes, noe som er etisk bekymringsfullt.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Doctor Thesis</style></work-type></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tora Benedicte Svare Leinan</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Katie Iren Wickstrøm</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dagfinn Bjørgen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Geir Småvik</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvang uten døgnopphold - &quot;Tvang som rutine?&quot;</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">erfaringer</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%">2021</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">08/2021</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://kbtkompetanse.no/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Hovedrapport_Nettversjon_TUD_2021.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kompetansesenter for brukererfaring og tjenesteutvikling (KBT) </style></publisher><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Mål for prosjektet Overordnet mål for prosjektet var å få mer kunnskap om hva informantene som er, eller har vært underlagt vedtak om Tvungent psykisk helsevern uten døgnopphold (TUD) mener alternativet kan være; hvordan de opplever TUD, hva de trenger hjelp til, hva de savnet av hjelp som alternativ til tvang. Prosjektet hadde også som intensjon å inkludere pårørendeperspektivet, men av ulike årsaker lot dette seg ikke gjøre, så prosjektet omhandler derfor kun informasjon fra pasienter med erfaring fra TUD, tvang uten døgnopphold. Disse vil i det videre kalles for informanter. Målet var også å ev. finne svar på hvorfor pasienter ikke frivillig tok imot hjelpen som ble tilbudt dem, slik at tvungent psykisk helsevern uten døgnopphold ble det valgte tiltak. Hensikten var i utgangspunktet å løfte frem både pasienters og pårørendes erfaringer/anbefalinger om hva som kan bidra til reduksjon i tvangsbruk. I denne rapporten har vi som sagt kun hentet erfaringer fra pasientene. Problemstilling Hvordan kan helseforetaket gi nødvendig helsehjelp til pasienter som ikke frivillig vil ta imot den hjelpen helsetjenesten tilbyr.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rapport</style></work-type><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%">Løvsletten, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Husum, T. L.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Haug, E.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Granerud, A.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cooperation in the mental health treatment of patients with outpatient commitment</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SAGE Open Medicine</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Outpatient commitment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">05/2020</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312120926410</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;h2&gt;Background:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;Patients with outpatient commitment have a decision on coercive treatment from the specialist health services even if they are in their own home and receive municipal health services.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h2&gt;Objective:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The aim of this study is to gain more knowledge about how the outpatient commitment system works in the municipal health service and specialist health services, and how they collaborate with patients and across service levels from the perspectives of healthcare professionals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h2&gt;Methods:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a qualitative study collecting data through focus group interviews with health personnel from the municipal health service and specialist health services.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h2&gt;Results:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The results describe the health personnel&amp;rsquo;s experiences with follow-up and interactions with the patients with outpatient commitment decisions, and their experiences with collaboration between service levels.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h2&gt;Conclusion:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study show that outpatient commitment makes a difference in the way patients with this decision are followed up. The legislative amendment with new requirements for consent competence was challenging. Collaboration between services levels was also challenging.&lt;/p&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>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Løvsletten, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Husum, T. L.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Granerud, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Haug, E.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Outpatient commitment in mental health services from a municipal view</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Int. Journal of Law and Psychiatry</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%">CTO</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">kommune</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Outpatient commitment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">primærhelsetjeneste</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvungent psykisk helsevern uten døgnopphold</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">03/2020</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160252720300108?dgcid=author</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">69</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;h3 id=&quot;st0010&quot;&gt;Background&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;sp0025&quot;&gt;Outpatient commitment (OC) is a legal decision for compulsory mental health care when the patient stays in his or her own home. Municipal health-care workers have a key role for patients with OC decision, but little is known about how the legislation system with OC works from the municipality&amp;#39;s point of view.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 id=&quot;st0015&quot;&gt;Method&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;sp0030&quot;&gt;The present study has a quantitative descriptive design using an electronic questionnaire sent to health-care workers in the municipalities that participated. The study included health-care workers from the mental health services in two counties in Norway who have experience with psychosis and OC decisions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 id=&quot;st0020&quot;&gt;Results&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;sp0035&quot;&gt;There were 230 people who received the questionnaire. The sample consisted of various health professionals from both small and large municipalities.The results show which tasks they have in follow-up of patients in the municipalities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 id=&quot;st0025&quot;&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p id=&quot;sp0040&quot;&gt;From the municipality&amp;#39;s point of view, there are no significant differences in follow-up for patients with or without an OC decision, apart from conversations about medication. An individual plan is rarely used to facilitate follow-up, although this is the statutory right of patients with OC decisions. The health-care workers lack knowledge and education about the OC scheme. The cooperation between municipalities and the specialist health-care services is not clearly defined.&lt;/p&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>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Løvsletten, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Haug, E.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Granerud, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nordby, K.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Prevalence and management of patients with outpatient commitment in the mental health services</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nordic Journal of Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">02/2016</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">70</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">401-406</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Background People with mental health problems are mostly treated within the community. The law allows for the use of compulsory mental health care both in hospital and in the community. Various forms of&amp;nbsp;outpatient commitment&amp;nbsp;(OC) have been adopted in much European legislation. To be subjected to OC is a serious intervention in a person&amp;#39;s life. Aim The purpose of this study is to gain knowledge about patients who undergo OC. The study explores the incidence and prevalence of OC in a geographical area, the central characteristics of the sample, and how the framework for follow-up treatment for patients to resolve OC works. Methods The data were collected from a review of electronic patient records. The statistical methods used in this study were descriptive analysis, with frequency analysis and cross-tabulation analysis. Results The main finding in the present study is that the use of OC has increased. An important finding is that most of the patients have a decision made for OC that is justified by the treatment criterion. The present study shows that there is insufficient documentation on statutory responsibilities for follow-up treatment of patients with an OC. Conclusions This study shows that the use of OC has increased. It should be considered whether implemented measures to reduce the use of coercion have the desired effect.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6</style></issue><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">401</style></section><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>34</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Løvsletten</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bruk av tvungent vern uten døgnbehandling. En kvantitativ studie</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">kvantitativ</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvungent psykisk helsevern uten døgnopphold</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://brage.inn.no/inn-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/132596/L%c3%b8vsletten.pdf?sequence=1&amp;isAllowed=y</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Høgskolen i Innlandet</style></publisher><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Formål&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I Norge gir Psykisk helsevernloven mulighet for å anvende tvunget psykisk helsevern uten&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;døgnopphold (TUD) hvis dette blir vurdert som et bedre alternativ for pasienten enn å være&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;innlagt på insttusjon med tvang. Det er lite publiserte studier om denne ordningen.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hensiktenmed studien er å få mer kunnskap om bruk av TUD i Hedmark og Oppland.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hovedproblemstillingen i oppgaven er hva som kjennetegner bruk av tvungent psykisk&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;helsevern i Hedmark og Oppland, insidens og prevalens i en tidsperiode, begrunnelse for&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;vedtak og hvilken behandlingsoppfølging pasientene får.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Metode&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Studien er en kvantitativ studie. Dataene er samlet inn retrospektivt fra journaler i Sykehuset&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Innlandet og analysert ved hjelp av deskriptive analyser. Studien omfatter alle pasienter over&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;18 år som har vedtak om tvunget psykisk helsevern uten døgnopphold i Hedmark og Oppland&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;i perioden 01.01. 2008 &amp;ndash; 31.12. 2011. Datainnsamling omfatter omfang, vedtak, diagnoser,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;behandlingsoppfølging, individuelle planer, bruk av psykisk helsevern og demografiske data.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Resultat&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Studien viser at det er 1,1 % av pasienter i psykisk helsevern som har vedtak om tvang uten&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;døgn i Innlandet. Resultatet viser tilnærmet lik kjønnsfordeling i utvalget. 93 % pasientene har&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;en diagnose i schizofrenispekteret i kategorien F 20-F29 i ICD-10. 32 % av pasientene har rus&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;som tilleggsproblematikk. 83 % bor alene og 75 % er uføretrygdede. Det er 61 % som fikk&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;oppfølging fra både spesialist- og kommunehelsetjenesten. 62 % har registeret i journal at de&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;har en individuell plan.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Resultatene viser en økning i index TUD i perioden 2008-2011 fra 9 vedtak til 17. Prevalens&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;av TUD har også økt i samme periode fra 34 vedtak til 51. 72 % av utvalget fikk vedtak om&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;tvang uten døgn begrunnet med behandlingskriteriet.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Konklusjon&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bruk av tvang uten døgn i Hedmark og Oppland kjennetegnes ved at det hovedsakelig er&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;alvorlig syke pasienter med diagnose i schizofrenispekteret som har TUD vedtak og de aller&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;fleste får vedtak begrunnet med behandlingskriteriet. Både index TUD og prevalens av TUD&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;har økt i perioden. Flertallet får behandlingsoppfølging både i fra spesialisthelsetjenesten og&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;kommunehelsetjenesten.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mastergradsoppgave</style></work-type><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tud</style></label></record></records></xml>