Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Variations between, and within, jurisdictions in the use of community treatment orders and other compulsory community treatment: study of 402 060 people across four Australian states
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Variations between, and within, jurisdictions in the use of community treatment orders and other compulsory community treatment: study of 402 060 people across four Australian states
Do you wish to request the book?
Variations between, and within, jurisdictions in the use of community treatment orders and other compulsory community treatment: study of 402 060 people across four Australian states
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Variations between, and within, jurisdictions in the use of community treatment orders and other compulsory community treatment: study of 402 060 people across four Australian states
2025
Overview
The use of compulsory community treatment (CCT) in Australia is some of the highest worldwide despite limited evidence of effectiveness. Even within Australia, use varies widely across jurisdictions despite general similarities in legislation and health services. However, there is much less information on whether variation occurs within the same jurisdiction.
To measure variations in the use of CCT in a standardised way across the following four Australian jurisdictions: Queensland, South Australia, New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria. We also investigated associated sociodemographic variables.
We used aggregated administrative data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
There were data on 402 060 individuals who were in contact with specialist mental health services, of whom 51 351 (12.8%) were receiving CCT. Percentages varied from 8% in NSW to 17.6% in South Australia. There were also wide variations within jurisdictions. In NSW, prevalence ranged from 2% to 13%, in Victoria from 6% to 24%, in Queensland from 11% to 25% and in South Australia from 6% to 36%. People in contact with services who were male, single and aged between 25 and 44 years old were significantly more likely to be subject to CCT, as were people living in metropolitan areas or those born outside Oceania.
There are marked variations in the use of CCT both within and between Australian jurisdictions. It is unclear how much of this variation is determined by clinical need and these findings may be of relevance to jurisdictions with similar clinician-initiated orders.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
