BackgroundSince 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.MethodsThe 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.ResultsWhile 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.DiscussionThe 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.ConclusionsAlthough 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.

BackgroundCo-occurring substance use increases the risk of hospitalisation in people with severe mental illness, whereas Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) generally reduces hospitalisation in patients with severe mental illness and high inpatient service use. Because the superiority of ACT over standard services amongst patients with problematic substance use is uncertain, the present study examined inpatient service use amongst patients with and without problematic substance use in the 2 years before and the 2 years after they enrolled into ACT teams.MethodsThis naturalistic observational study included 142 patients of 12 different ACT teams throughout Norway. The teams assessed the patients upon enrolment into ACT using clinician-rated and self-reported questionnaires. We obtained hospitalisation data from the Norwegian Patient Register for the 2 years before and the 2 years after enrolment into ACT. We used linear mixed models to assess changes in hospitalisation and to explore associations between problematic substance use and changes in hospitalisation, controlling for socio-demographic and clinical characteristics.ResultsA total of 84 (59 %) participants had problematic substance use upon enrolment into the ACT teams. In the 2 years after ACT enrolment both participants with and without problematic substance use experienced a reduction in total inpatient days. Those with problematic substance use also had fewer involuntary inpatient days. Exploratory analyses suggested that symptom severity and functioning level interacted with problematic substance use to influence change in total inpatient days.ConclusionThese findings may suggest that ACT teams successfully support people with complex mental health problems in the community, including those with problematic substance use, and thereby contribute to a reduction in inpatient service use.

Background: Persons with severe mental illness often face difficulties in accessing and receiving adequate services enabling them to live independently. Many have co-occurring substance use problems that increase the risk of adverse outcomes. Community-based service models have been implemented around the world, including assertive community treatment (ACT), but the knowledge of rehabilitation outcomes in different subgroups is limited. We aimed to explore rehabilitation outcomes among patients suffering severe mental illness with and without substance use problems who had received ACT services for at least 2 years. Additionally, we compared differences in changes between the two groups.Methods: A total of 142 patients who received services for 2 years from the first 12 Norwegian ACT teams were included. Eighty-four (59%) had problematic substance use, while 58 (41%) did not. Data regarding housing, activity, symptoms, functioning, and subjective quality of life were collected upon enrollment into ACT and at 2 years of follow-up. Clinician-rated scales and self-report questionnaires were used. Changes within the two groups and differences in change between the groups were assessed using generalized linear mixed models.Results: Both groups were more likely to have good housing, higher level of functioning, and less anxiety and depressive symptoms after 2 years. The odds of good housing among participants with problematic substance use increased only after adjusting for age and gender. Participants with problematic substance use had less severe symptoms, particularly negative and manic symptoms, while participants without problematic substance use reported improved satisfaction with life in general. Neither group experienced a change in having a meaningful daily activity, positive symptoms, practical and social functioning, or subjective quality of life. The reduction of manic symptoms in the substance use group was the only difference between the groups.Conclusion: After 2 years, patients with and without problematic substance use experienced improvements in several important domains. Furthermore, the improvements were similar in both groups for most outcomes. This may suggest that ACT has a place in the continued effort toward integrated and comprehensive community services empowering patients with severe mental illness to achieve and sustain an independent life, including marginalized groups with severe substance use.