Outpatient competence restoration: A model and outcomes

Abstract

AIM: To describe a model outpatient competence restoration program (OCRP) and provide data on time to restoration of adjudicative competence. METHODS: The authors tracked the process by which individuals are referred for outpatient competence restoration (OCR) by courts in the United States capital, describing the unique requirements of American law, and the avenues available for compelling adherence. Competence to stand trial is a critical gate-keeping function of the judicial and forensic communities and assures that defendants understand courtroom procedures. OCR is therefore an effort to assure fairness and protection of important legal rights. Multi-media efforts are described that educate patients and restore competence to stand trial. These include resources such as group training, use of licensed clinicians, visual aids, structured instruments, and cinema. Aggregate data from the OCRP’s previous 4 years of OCR efforts were reviewed for demographic characteristics, restoration rate, and time to restoration. Poisson regression modeling identified the differences in restoration between sequential 45-d periods after entrance into the program. RESULTS: In the past 4 years, the DC OCRP has been successful in restoring 55 of 170 participants (32%), with an average referral rate of 35 persons per year. 76% are restored after the initial 45 d in the program. Demographics of the group indicate a predominance of African-American men with a mean age of 42. Thought disorders predominate and individuals in care face misdemeanor charges 78% of the time. Poisson regression modeling of the number attaining competence during four successive 45-d periods showed a substantial difference among the time periods for the rate of attaining competence (P = 0.0011). The three time periods after 45 d each showed a significant decrease in the restoration rate when compared to the initial 0 to 45 d period - their relative rates were only 22% to 33% as high as the rate for 0-45 d (all P-values, compared to the 0-45 d rate, were 0.013 or smaller). However, the three periods from day 45 to day 135 showed no difference among themselves (P = 0.87). CONCLUSION: The majority of restored participants were restored after 45 d, suggesting a model that may identify an optimal length of time to restoration.