Prevalence of deprivation of liberty: A survey of in-patient services

Abstract

Aims and method: A trust-wide survey of all in-patients to estimate the prevalence of likely deprivation of liberty and to investigate how two different approaches to measuring deprivation might affect the number identified. Results: A notable difference in the results was detected when comparing the two methods. One survey method identified deprivation of liberty factors in 84% of informal incapacitous patients, whereas a different approach that weighed up the factors in accordance with the UK government's interpretation of the case law detected only 11% as potential cases. Clinical implications: To be usefully implemented, the deprivation of liberty safeguards require an accurate method of assessment in order to target those the process is designed to protect. This survey demonstrates the difficulties in defining deprivation of liberty and highlights the issue of how it is best measured. Declaration of interest: None.