Appropriateness of psychiatric advance directives facilitated by peer support specialists and clinicians on Assertive Community Treatment teams

Background Psychiatric advance directives (PADs) are used to document a person's treatment preferences for a future mental health crisis. Peer support specialists have been proposed to facilitate PADs, but little is known about the quality of peer versus clinician facilitated PADs. Aims This study examined whether PAD documents facilitated by peer specialists and non-peer clinicians differed in the mix of treatment requests and refusals and expert ratings of feasibility and consistency. Methods Analyses were conducted of content and expert ratings of 72 PAD documents from a randomized trial of PAD facilitation by peers and clinicians on Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) teams. A count of treatment refusals and requests was used to classify documents as predominantly prescriptive, proscriptive, or balanced. Regression was used to estimate relationships between PAD facilitator type and content. Results Peer-facilitated PADs were significantly more likely to be predominantly prescriptive than were PADs facilitated by non-peer clinicians. Prescriptive PADs were more likely to receive expert ratings of high feasibility and consistency. Conclusions Results should alleviate some clinicians' apprehensions regarding the appropriateness of peer-facilitated PADs, such as the concern that people with lived experience with mental illness might encourage other consumers to use their PAD primarily for treatment refusals.