↓ Skip to main content

Increased influence and collaboration: a qualitative study of patients’ experiences of community treatment orders within an assertive community treatment setting

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Increased influence and collaboration: a qualitative study of patients’ experiences of community treatment orders within an assertive community treatment setting
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1083-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hanne Kilen Stuen, Jorun Rugkåsa, Anne Landheim, Rolf Wynn

Abstract

Since 2009, 14 assertive community treatment (ACT) teams have started up in Norway. Over 30 % of the patients treated by the ACT teams were subject to community treatment orders (CTOs) at intake. CTOs are legal mechanisms to secure treatment adherence for patients with severe mental illness. Little is known about patients' views and experiences of CTOs within an ACT context. The study was based on qualitative in depth interviews with 15 patients that were followed up by ACT teams and that were currently subjected to CTOs. The data were analyzed by using a modified grounded theory approach. While some participants experienced the CTO as a security net and as an important factor for staying well, others described the CTO as a social control mechanism and as a violation of their autonomy. Although experiencing difficulties and tensions, many participants described the ACT team as a different mental health arena from what they had known before, with another frame of interaction. Despite being legally compelled to receive treatment, many participants talked about how the ACT teams focused on addressing unmet needs, the management of future crises, and finding solutions to daily life problems. Assistance with housing and finances, reduced social isolation, and being able to seek help voluntarily were positive outcomes emphasized by many patients. The participants had different views of being on a CTO within an ACT setting. While some remained clearly negative to the CTO, others described a gradual transition toward regarding the CTO as an acceptablesolution as they gained experience of ACT. Many of the participants valued the supportive relationship withthe ACT team, and communication with the care providers and the care providers' attitudes could make a significant difference. The study shows that the perception of coercion is context dependent, and that the relationship between care providers and patients is of importance to how patients interpret the providers' behavior and the restrictive interventions. Although some patients focused on loss of autonomy and being compelled to take medications, other patients emphasised the supportive relationships they had with the ACT teams and that they had received help with housing, finances, and other daily life problems. Thus, being on mandated community treatment could be acceptable in the opinion of several of the patients, provided that they received other services that they found beneficial.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 12 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 24%
Psychology 16 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 21%
Social Sciences 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 13 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2016.
All research outputs
#11,120,742
of 18,936,256 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,028
of 6,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,656
of 258,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,936,256 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 258,829 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them