Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T03:59:50.521Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in use of coercive measures in psychiatric hospitals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2020

B. Lay ,
C. Nordt  and
W. Rössler
B. Lay*
Affiliation:
Psychiatric University Hospital Zurich, Research Unit for Clinical and Social Psychiatry, Militärstrasse 8, PO Box 1930, 8021 Zurich, Switzerland
C. Nordt
Affiliation:
Psychiatric University Hospital Zurich, Research Unit for Clinical and Social Psychiatry, Militärstrasse 8, PO Box 1930, 8021 Zurich, Switzerland
W. Rössler
Affiliation:
Psychiatric University Hospital Zurich, Research Unit for Clinical and Social Psychiatry, Militärstrasse 8, PO Box 1930, 8021 Zurich, Switzerland
*
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +41 44 296 7372; fax: +41 44 296 7409. E-mail address: [email protected] (B. Lay).
Get access

Abstract

Purpose

The use of coercive measures in psychiatry is still poorly understood. Most empirical research has been limited to compulsory admission and to risk factors on an individual patient level. This study addresses three coercive measures and the role of predictive factors at both patient and institutional levels.

Methods

Using the central psychiatric register that covers all psychiatric hospitals in Canton Zurich (1.3 million people), Switzerland, we traced all inpatients in 2007 aged 18–70 (n = 9698). We used GEE models to analyse variation in rates between psychiatric hospitals.

Results

Overall, we found quotas of 24.8% involuntary admissions, 6.4% seclusion/restraint and 4.2% coerced medication. Results suggest that the kind and severity of mental illness are the most important risk factors for being subjected to any form of coercion. Variation across the six psychiatric hospitals was high, even after accounting for risk factors on the patient level suggesting that centre effects are an important source of variability. However, effects of the hospital characteristics ‘size of the hospital’, ‘length of inpatient stay’, and ‘work load of the nursing staff’ were only weak (‘bed occupancy rate’ was not statistically significant).

Conclusion

The significant variation in use of coercive measures across psychiatric hospitals needs further study.

Keywords

Compulsory admissionRestraintSeclusionCoerced medicationPsychiatric hospitalizationMental disorder
Type
Original article
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , May 2011 , pp. 244 - 251
Copyright
Copyright © Elsevier Masson SAS 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bellamy, SL, Gibberd, R, Hancock, L, Howley, P, Kennedy, B, Klar, N, et al.Analysis of dichotomous outcome data for community intervention studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2000; 9: 135–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhui, K, Stansfeld, S, Hull, S, Priebe, S, Mole, F, Feder, GEthnic variations in pathways to and use of specialist mental health services in the UK. Systematic review. Br J Psychiatry 2003; 182: 105–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bindman, J, Tighe, J, Thornicroft, G, Leese, MPoverty, poor services, and compulsory psychiatric admission in England. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 2002; 37: 341–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonsack, C, Borgeat, FPerceived coercion and need for hospitalization related to psychiatric admission. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 2007; 28: 342–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bredthauer, D, Becker, C, Eichner, B, Koczy, P, Nikolaus, TFactors relating to the use of physical restraints in psychogeriatric care: a paradigm for elder abuse. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie 2005; 38: 10–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, JS, Tooke, SKOn the seclusion of psychiatric patients. Social Science and Medicine 1992; 35: 711–721.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christen, C, Christen, SZwangseinweisungen in psychiatrische Kliniken in der Schweiz. Analyse der Psychatrie-Zusatzdaten 2000–2002. Arbeitsdokument 13. 2005 Schweizerisches Gesundheitsobservatorium NeuchâtelGoogle Scholar
Collegium-Internationale-Psychiatriae-Scalarum. Internationale Skalen für .Psychiatrie [International scales for psychiatry]. Goettingen: Beltz Test; 1996.Google Scholar
Cougnard, A, Kalmi, E, Desage, A, Misdrahi, D, Abalan, F, Brun-Rousseau, H, et al.Factors influencing compulsory admission in first-admitted subjects with psychosis. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 2004; 39: 804–809.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, WARestraint and seclusion: a review of the literature. Am J Psychiatry 1994; 151: 1584–1591.Google ScholarPubMed
Hansson, L, Muus, S, Saarento, O, Vinding, HR, Göstas, G, Sandlund, M, et al.The Nordic comparative study on sectorized psychiatry: rates of compulsory care and use of compulsory admissions during a 1-year follow-up. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 1999; 34: 99–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatling, T, Krogen, T, Ulleberg, PCompulsory admissions to psychiatric hospitals in Norway – international comparisons and regional variations. Journal of Mental Health 2002; 11: 623–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, M, Rossler, WEnhancement of outpatient treatment adherence: patients’ perceptions of coercion, fairness and effectiveness. Psychiatry Research 2010; 180: 48–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaltiala-Heino, R, Korkeila, J, Tuohimäki, C, Tuori, T, Lehtinen, VCoercion and restrictions in psychiatric inpatient treatment. European Psychiatry 2000; 15: 213–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, BD, Clarke, M, Browne, S, McTigue, O, Kamali, M, Gervin, M, et al.Clinical predictors of admission status in first episode schizophrenia. European Psychiatry 2004; 19: 67–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keski-Valkama, A, Sailas, E, Eronen, M, Koivisto, AM, Lönnqvist, J, Kaltiala-Heino, RThe reasons for using restraint and seclusion in psychiatric inpatient care: a nationwide 15-year study. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry 2010; 64: 136–144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kmietowicz, ZLondon is more likely to detain people with mental problems. BMJ: British Medical Journal 2003;327():1184Google ScholarPubMed
Lay, B, Lauber, C, Rössler, WAre immigrants at a disadvantage in psychiatric in-patient care? Acta Psychiatr Scand 2005; 111: 358–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lay, B, Nordt, C, Rössler, WTrends in psychiatric hospitalisation of people with schizophrenia: a register-based investigation over the last three decades. Schizophrenia Research 2007; 97: 68–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lidz, CWCoercion in psychiatric care: what have we learned from research? J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 1998; 26: 631–637.Google ScholarPubMed
Prinsen, EJD, van Delden, JJMCan we justify eliminating coercive measures in psychiatry? Journal of Medical Ethics 2009; 35: 69–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PSYREC. Psychiatric Statistics of the Canton of Zurich Switzerland http://www.pmh.uzh.ch/index.htm.Google Scholar
Riecher, A, Rössler, W, Löffler, W, Fätkenheuer, BFactors influencing compulsory admission of psychiatric patients. Psychological Medicine 1991; 21: 197–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riecher-Rössler, A, Rössler, WCompulsory admission of psychiatric patients – an international comparison. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 1993; 87: 231–236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sailas, E, Fenton, MSeclusion and restraint for people with serious mental illnesses. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009Google Scholar
Salize, HJ, Dressing, HEpidemiology of involuntary placement of mentally ill people across the European Union. Br J Psychiatry 2004; 184: 163–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schweizerische Adademie der Medizinischen SAMW. Wissenschaften Zwangsmassnahmen in der Medizin. Medizinisch-ethische Richtlinien der SAMW http://www.samw.ch/de/Ethik/Richtlinien/Aktuell-gueltige-Richtlinien.html.Google Scholar
Smolka, M, Klimitz, H, Scheuring, B, Fähndrich, EZwangsmassnahmen in der Psychiatrie aus der Sicht der Patienten. Der Nervenarzt 1997; 68: 888–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spengler, AFactors influencing assignment of patients to compulsory admission. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 1986; 21: 113–122.Google ScholarPubMed
Statistical Office of the Canton of Zurich Statistisches Jahrbuch des Kantons Zürich. Zürich: Statistisches Amt des Kantons Zürich 2009Google Scholar
Steinert, T, Martin, V, Baur, M, Bohnet, U, Goebel, R, Hermelink, G, et al.Diagnosis-related frequency of compulsory measures in 10 German psychiatric hospitals and correlates with hospital characteristics. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 2007; 42: 140–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swiss Medical Association. Berufstätige Ärzte nach Kanton und Fachgebiet http://www.fmh.ch/files/pdf4/stt04_081.pdf.Google Scholar
The Federal Authorities of the Swiss Confederation. Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch (Classified Compilation of Federal Legislation) http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/210/a397a.html.Google Scholar
Wall, S, Hotopf, M, Wessely, S, Churchill, RTrends in the use of the Mental Health Act: England, 1984–96. BMJ 1999; 318: 1520–1521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, J, Preston, NJ, Kisely, SWhat determines compulsory community treatment? A logistic regression analysis using linked mental health and offender databases. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 2004; 38: 613–618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zinkler, M, Priebe, SDetention of the mentally ill in Europe – a review. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 2002; 106: 3–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.