Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:53:08.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Documentation of Capacity Assessments for Psychiatric Inpatients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2023

Keith Ngwenya*
Affiliation:
Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

How frequently and to what quality are mental capacity assessments being recorded on inpatient acute ward? Capacity is the ability to consent to a particular decision and is defined in law by the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). Capacity to make decisions is an area of particular importance in mental health care, as many mental illnesses can lead to people losing the capacity to make some decisions. Capacity assessment is a two-stage process. If a patient passes Stage 1, then they have capacity. If they fail Stage 1 then the assessment progresses to Stage 2. The person being assessed must then be competent at every step of Stage 2 to then be deemed to have capacity. Documentation of capacity assessments should demonstrate this two-stage assessment.

Methods

The sample included all people who were inpatients during the data collection window of 05 to 09 Sep 2022.

For each person, their MHA status was recorded as this determined whether capacity to consent to admission was relevant. For each patient, their EPR was checked for any Mental Capacity Assessment proformas which were examined and recorded as being for admission, treatment, or something else. The cumulative case notes were then searched for any mention of ‘capacity’ and any additional capacity assessments were examined and added to the tool. All capacity assessments were reviewed against the defined standards.

Results

Sample and demographics - 22 male inpatients. 21 patients subject to the MHA and 1 was an informal patient. The CTT rule applied to 7 patients.

Treatment - 17 of 22 had capacity assessment for treatment at admission. All of these were recorded using the proforma and all were in line with best practice guidance. 7 had the CTT rule applied to at the time of the audit. None of the records for these people included documentation of a repeated mental capacity assessment.

Something Else - 9 capacity assessments recorded for ‘something else’. Five were recorded on proforma and in line with best practice guidance. 4 capacity assessments were as case notes and didn't meet best practice criteria.

Conclusion

Capacity assessment for treatment is being conducted and recorded well at the time of admission, but not at the point that CTT rules apply from.

Most capacity assessments were recorded on the EPR proforma and all of these met best practice guidance. 4 capacity assessments were recorded in case notes and none of these met best practice guidance.

Type
Audit
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This does not need to be placed under each abstract, just each page is fine.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.