Author:
Mason Julian,Roberts Hannah,Northridge Rebecca,Fountoulaki Garyfallia,Andrews Emma,Watcyn-Jones Cassie,Manion Terri,Chalmers Julie,Davison Phil
Abstract
Aims and methodTo audit the quality of medical recommendations for detention under the Mental Health Act 1983, Section 2 and 3. The recommendations were tested against a gold standard based on the statutory criteria. Two cycles were completed, the first containing 214 recommendations, the second 202. Relevant education took place after the first cycle.ResultsThe percentage of medical recommendations containing clear statements of why each of the statutory criteria was met increased in the second cycle. It reached 87% for mental disorder; 87% for nature and/or degree; 75% for why community treatment was not possible; 64% for why detention was in the interests of health; 60% for safety; 55% for protection of others; and 70% why informal admission was not possible.Clinical implicationsDoctors, scrutineers and approved mental health practitioners welcomed clear guidance about what is expected in a medical recommendation for detention and endorsed the gold standard described. Armed with a better understanding of what is expected and a template to follow, there was an improvement in the reasons given for detention.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献