Accumulated coercion and short-term outcome of inpatient psychiatric care

An Exploratory Study about Factors and Outcomes Associated with the Experience of Coercive Measures in Mental Health Settings

Coercive measures are commonly used in mental health settings despite their negative effects. The subjective experience of coercion varies widely, and its short- and long-term health impacts are not well understood. This study aimed to analyze the association between different types of coercive measures experienced during psychiatric hospitalization, the subjective experience of coercion, and both short- and long-term health outcomes. The study included 111 patients from two mental health units who experienced coercive measures (mechanical restraint, involuntary medication, or both). Perceived coercion was assessed during hospitalization. Short-term outcomes (post-traumatic stress and treatment satisfaction) were evaluated before discharge, while long-term outcomes (functionality improvement, risk of readmission, and suicidal behavior) were assessed at five-year follow-up. Perceived coercion was associated with higher post-traumatic stress (p < 0.001) and lower satisfaction with treatment (p < 0.001) in the short term. In the long term, perceived coercion showed no association with functionality, readmission risk, or suicidal behavior. However, combined coercive measures were linked to lower functionality improvement (p = 0.028) and higher readmission risk (p = 0.028) compared to involuntary medication alone. The findings suggest that efforts to reduce negative subjective experiences associated with coercive measures may improve patient satisfaction and reduce trauma risk during hospitalization. Combined coercive measures may be a risk factor for poorer long-term outcomes and should be carefully considered.

Effect of coercive measures on mental health status in adult psychiatric populations: a nationwide trial emulation

AIMS

Healthcare staff use coercive measures to manage patients at acute risk of harm to self or others, but their effect on patients' mental health is underexplored. This nationwide Swiss study emulated a trial to investigate the effects of coercive measures on the mental health of psychiatric inpatients at discharge.

METHODS

We analysed retrospective longitudinal data from all Swiss adult psychiatric hospitals that provided acute care (2019-2021). The primary exposure was any coercive measure during hospitalization; secondary exposures were seclusion, restraint and forced medication. Our primary outcome was Health of the Nations Outcome Scale (HoNOS) score at discharge. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to emulate random assignment to the exposure.

RESULTS

Of 178,369 hospitalizations, 9.2% (n = 18,800) included at least one coercive measure. In patients exposed to coercive measures, mental health worsened a small but statistically significant amount more than in non-exposed patients. Those who experienced at least one coercive measure during hospitalization had a significantly higher HoNOS score (1.91-point, p < .001, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.73; 2.09) than those who did not experience any coercive measure. Results were similar for seclusion (1.60-point higher score, p < .001, 95% CI: 1.40; 1.79) and forced medication (1.97-point higher score, p < .001, 95% CI: 1.65; 2.30). Restraint had the strongest effect (2.83-point higher score, p < .001, 95% CI: 2.38; 3.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study presents robust empirical evidence highlighting the detrimental impact of coercive measures on the mental health of psychiatric inpatients. It underscores the importance of avoiding these measures in psychiatric hospitals and emphasized the urgent need for implementing alternatives in clinical practice.

Sex differences in functional outcome after hospitalisation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The aims of this review were to determine: i) how many studies have examined global functioning outcomes from a psychiatric inpatient stay disaggregated by sex; and ii) if women have worse global functioning outcomes than men following an admission. A systematic review following PRISMA guidance and meta-analysis were conducted. Thirty-six studies met eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review. Of these, eleven papers provided sufficient data to conduct a meta-analysis of global functioning outcomes comparing men and women. Overall, differences between men and women were small. The meta-analysis revealed either no difference or a small significant difference in global functioning outcomes in favour of women, contrary to expectations. As many as 93% of otherwise eligible studies had to be excluded for not disaggregating data by sex. Women may have slightly superior functioning outcomes than men suggesting that inpatient services should be more heavily focused on applying principles of gender-informed care for men as well as women. The finding that so many potential studies had to be excluded for not reporting sex differences is consistent with other mental health literature and highlights a need for better reporting practices in relation to sex differences.

International research into 22 years of use of chemical restraint: An evidence overview

BACKGROUND

Chemical restraint (CR) (also known as rapid tranquilisation) is the forced (non-consenting) administration of medications to manage uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violence in people who are likely to cause harm to themselves or others. Our population of interest was adults with mental health disorders (with/without substance abuse). There has been a growing international movement over the past 22 years towards reducing/eliminating restrictive practices such as CR. It is appropriate to summarise the research that has been published over this time, identify trends and gaps in knowledge, and highlight areas for new research to inform practice.

AIMS

To undertake a comprehensive systematic search to identify, and describe, the volume and nature of primary international research into CR published since 1995.

METHODS

This paper reports the processes and overall findings of a systematic search for all available primary research on CR published between 1 January 1996 and 31 July 2018. It describes the current evidence base by hierarchy of evidence, country (ies) producing the research, CR definitions, study purpose, and outcome measures.

RESULTS

This review identified 311 relevant primary studies (21 RCTs; 46 non-controlled experimental or prospective observational studies; 77 cross-sectional studies; 69 retrospective studies; 67 opinion pieces, position or policy statements; and 31 qualitative studies). The USA, UK, and Australia contributed over half the research, whilst cross-country collaborations comprised 6% of it. The most common research settings comprised acute psychiatric wards (23.3%), general psychiatric wards (21.6%), and general hospital emergency departments (19.0%).

DISCUSSION

A key lesson learnt whilst compiling this database of research into CR was to ensure that all papers described non-consenting administration of medications to manage adults with uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violence. There were tensions in the literature between using effective CR without producing adverse events, and how to decide when CR was needed (compared with choosing non-chemical intervention for behavioural emergencies), respecting patients' dignity whilst safeguarding their safety, and preserving safe workplaces for staff, and care environments for other patients. The range of outcome measures suggests opportunities to standardise future research.

[Empirical investigation to assess the quality of psychiatric treatment]

BACKGROUND

Quality of treatment is of increasing importance in psychiatry. Since the 1950s psychiatry has developed plenty of psychological and occupational approaches in addition to an arsenal of biological procedures. These treatment options have contributed to markedly lower the residence times in psychiatric medical centers to about 3 or 4 weeks.

METHOD

The quality of treatment of a psychiatric clinic was evaluated on the basis of a limited number of parameters and in a short time. The data of 657 patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

The patients profited significantly from the treatment, particularly when specific therapies were available as in depression or schizophrenia. About ¼ of the patients received no psychoactive drugs. Most of the patients could be discharged from hospital within 3 weeks. The legal basis of hospitalization did not play a decisive role in the success of treatment. Most of the patients were after-treated by general practitioners.

CONCLUSION

The result underlines the effectiveness of psychiatric treatment, but also the importance of cooperation between inpatient and outpatient treatment.

Perceived Institutional Restraint Is Associated With Psychological Distress in Forensic Psychiatric Inpatients

Background: Patients in forensic mental health care experience internal and external coercion; the latter comprises different levels of institutional restraint. These restrictions of individual freedom are mainly justified by the safety interests of third parties and are not necessarily in the patients' best interests. The effects of such a setting on mentally disordered offenders' psychological state and treatment course are not fully understood. Assessing both patients' perception of restraint and psychopathological symptoms would allow us to better understand how restraint and psychopathology interact and how they might influence treatment. Methods: In 184 forensic psychiatric inpatients, we assessed perception of institutional restraint with an adapted version of the Measuring the Quality of Prison Life (aMQPL) questionnaire and current psychological state with the Brief Symptom Checklist (BSCL) and Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS). Results: Perceived institutional restraint (as expressed in the aMPQL subscales Transparency of procedures and decisions, Fairness, and Respect) was associated with a higher general level of psychological symptoms. Furthermore, patients who perceived a lack of institutional transparency and respect were more likely to have higher scores for hostility, depression, and suicidal ideation. We also found age and sex differences, with higher levels of psychological symptoms in younger and female patients. The diagnosis and duration of detention did not relate to perceived restraint. Discussion: Our results indicate that certain aspects of institutional restraint in long-term forensic inpatient settings correlate with certain psychological symptoms. The observed association might be explained by different kinds of factors: institutional (custodial focus), individual (self-efficacy, diagnosis, and personality), and situational (duration of detention). Although not all of these explanatory factors were addressed by the present study design, forensic mental health professionals should be aware of the relationship between perceived institutional restriction and psychopathology because it might influence treatment course and outcome.

Ethical deliberations about involuntary treatment: interviews with Swedish psychiatrists

BACKGROUND

Involuntary treatment is a key issue in healthcare ethics. In this study, ethical issues relating to involuntary psychiatric treatment are investigated through interviews with Swedish psychiatrists.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted with eight Swedish psychiatrists, focusing on their experiences of and views on compulsory treatment. In relation to this, issues about patient autonomy were also discussed. The interviews were analysed using a descriptive qualitative approach.

RESULTS

The answers focus on two main aspects of compulsory treatment. Firstly, deliberations about when and why it was justifiable to make a decision on involuntary treatment in a specific case. Here the cons and pros of ordering compulsory treatment were discussed, with particular emphasis on the consequences of providing treatment vs. refraining from ordering treatment. Secondly, a number of issues relating to background factors affecting decisions for or against involuntary treatment were also discussed. These included issues about the Swedish Mental Care Act, healthcare organisation and the care environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Involuntary treatment was generally seen as an unwanted exception to standard care. The respondents' judgments about involuntary treatment were typically in line with Swedish law on the subject. However, it was also argued that the law leaves room for individual judgments when making decisions about involuntary treatment. Much of the reasoning focused on the consequences of ordering involuntary treatment, where risk of harm to the therapeutic alliance was weighed against the assumed good consequences of ensuring that patients received needed treatment. Cases concerning suicidal patients and psychotic patients who did not realise their need for care were typically held as paradigmatic examples of justified involuntary care. However, there was an ambivalence regarding the issue of suicide as it was also argued that risk of suicide in itself might not be sufficient for justified involuntary care. It was moreover argued that organisational factors sometimes led to decisions about compulsory treatment that could have been avoided, given a more patient-oriented healthcare organisation.

Do patient and ward-related characteristics influence the use of coercive measures? Results from the EUNOMIA international study

PURPOSE

This study aims to identify whether selected patient and ward-related factors are associated with the use of coercive measures. Data were collected as part of the EUNOMIA international collaborative study on the use of coercive measures in ten European countries.

METHODS

Involuntarily admitted patients (N = 2,027) were divided into two groups. The first group (N = 770) included patients that had been subject to at least one of these coercive measures during hospitalization: restraint, and/or seclusion, and/or forced medication; the other group (N = 1,257) included patients who had not received any coercive measure during hospitalization. To identify predictors of use of coercive measures, both patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and centre-related characteristics were tested in a multivariate logistic regression model, controlled for countries' effect.

RESULTS

The frequency of the use of coercive measures varied significantly across countries, being higher in Poland, Italy and Greece. Patients who received coercive measures were more frequently male and with a diagnosis of psychotic disorder (F20-F29). According to the regression model, patients with higher levels of psychotic and hostility symptoms, and of perceived coercion had a higher risk to be coerced at admission. Controlling for countries' effect, the risk of being coerced was higher in Poland. Patients' sociodemographic characteristics and ward-related factors were not identifying as possible predictors because they did not enter the model.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of coercive measures varied significantly in the participating countries. Clinical factors, such as high levels of psychotic symptoms and high levels of perceived coercion at admission were associated with the use of coercive measures, when controlling for countries' effect. These factors should be taken into consideration by programs aimed at reducing the use of coercive measures in psychiatric wards.

Methodological and ethical challenges in studying patients' perceptions of coercion: a systematic mixed studies review

BACKGROUND

Despite improvements in psychiatric inpatient care, patient restrictions in psychiatric hospitals are still in use. Studying perceptions among patients who have been secluded or physically restrained during their hospital stay is challenging. We sought to review the methodological and ethical challenges in qualitative and quantitative studies aiming to describe patients' perceptions of coercive measures, especially seclusion and physical restraints during their hospital stay.

METHODS

Systematic mixed studies review was the study method. Studies reporting patients' perceptions of coercive measures, especially seclusion and physical restraints during hospital stay were included. Methodological issues such as study design, data collection and recruitment process, participants, sampling, patient refusal or non-participation, and ethical issues such as informed consent process, and approval were synthesized systematically. Electronic searches of CINALH, MEDLINE, PsychINFO and The Cochrane Library (1976-2012) were carried out.

RESULTS

Out of 846 initial citations, 32 studies were included, 14 qualitative and 18 quantitative studies. A variety of methodological approaches were used, although descriptive and explorative designs were used in most cases. Data were mainly collected in qualitative studies by interviews (n = 13) or in quantitative studies by self-report questionnaires (n = 12). The recruitment process was explained in 59% (n = 19) of the studies. In most cases convenience sampling was used, yet five studies used randomization. Patient's refusal or non-participation was reported in 37% (n = 11) of studies. Of all studies, 56% (n = 18) had reported undergone an ethical review process in an official board or committee. Respondents were informed and consent was requested in 69% studies (n = 22).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of different study designs made comparison methodologically challenging. The timing of data collection (considering bias and confounding factors) and the reasons for non-participation of eligible participants are likewise methodological challenges, e.g. recommended flow charts could aid the information. Other challenges identified were the recruitment of large and representative samples. Ethical challenges included requesting participants' informed consent and respecting ethical procedures.

Use of coercive measures in mental health practice and its impact on outcome: a critical review

Although coercive measures have always been part of the psychiatric armamentarium, the ethical dilemma between the use of a "therapeutic" coercion and the loss of patients' dignity is one of the major controversial issues in mental health research and practice. The aims of the present review are to explore the existing literature on predictors of use of coercive measures and to explore the relationship between coercive measures and patient outcome. A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, PsychyINFO, Scopus, Web of Knowledge and the Cochrane Database. In all selected papers, references were cross-checked to identify other possible eligible papers. The use of coercive measures was predicted by patients' clinical and socio-demographic features, staff characteristics and ward-related factors. Coercive measures have only a limited impact on patients' clinical and social outcome. At the current level of knowledge, coercion is still a controversial issue in mental health practice. Only few studies with a solid methodology have been carried out. Large multicenter and rigorous studies, with long-term follow-ups, are highly needed.

Severity of pre-existing psychiatric illness and response to the Great East Japan Earthquake

Reports have described how psychiatric patients respond to disasters. However, previous reports on the response depending on diagnostic categories have provided no clear consensus. Here we analyzed response to the Great East Japan Earthquake of March 11, 2011, among psychiatric patients in light of severity of pre-existing psychiatric illness. We studied psychiatric change among a population of psychiatric outpatients in Tochigi prefecture, located ~160 km (~100 miles) southeast of the Fukushima nuclear power plant, in an area that suffered moderate damage from the earthquake and radiation. A total of 294 psychiatric outpatients was assessed using the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF-F). A change of ≥10 points in the GAF-F score was counted as a change in symptoms. The data were stratified by disease category, gender, and GAF-F score and analyzed using the Fisher's exact test. In the 2 months after the earthquake, 5.4% of patients showed evidence of a change in symptoms, with 4.1% worsening and 1.4% improving. Compared with patients having a GAF-F score ≤50, significantly more patients with a score >50 showed evidence of worsening symptoms. No significant difference was found with respect to gender or diagnostic category for patients with worsened or improved symptoms. Our findings reveal that a relatively small percent of patients with pre-existing psychiatric diseases showed evidence of a change in symptoms and that patients with mild-to-moderate psychiatric illness are potentially vulnerable to the impacts of a natural disaster.

Relationship between patients' quality of life and coercion in psychiatric acute wards

The influence of coercion on quality of life (QoL) was investigated in 202 patients in acute psychiatric wards. There was no correlation between either subjective or objective coercion and QoL. Global Assessment of Functioning scores on improvement and insight were correlated with QoL.

Compulsory and voluntary admission in psychiatric hospitals in northern Norway 2009-2010. A national registry-based analysis

BACKGROUND

During the last decade, Norwegian healthcare authorities have been concerned about the frequent use of coercive measures in psychiatric care. On this background, we aimed to explore the voluntary and compulsory admissions in psychiatric hospitals in northern Norway, the University Hospital of North Norway in Tromsø (UNN-T) and the Nordland Hospital in Bodø (NH-B).

METHODS

All voluntary and compulsory admissions (2009-2010) among patients aged ≥18 years registered by the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR) were analyzed retrospectively. Compulsory admission was registered according to the general practitioner's (GP's) decision and the patients were hospitalized in Bodø or Tromsø. A total of 12,237 admissions and 242,148 days in hospital were identified. The female/male ratio of admission and stay was 1.17 and 1.15, respectively.

RESULTS

The admission rate (northern Norway =1.0) varied significantly from south to north (0.60-1.52). Whereas patients living close to the hospitals had the same admission rate as others, the mean hospital stay was significantly longer (ratio =1.32). Furthermore, the UNN-T had a higher re-admission rate (2% vs. 5%). Municipalities with District Psychiatric Centers (DPC) did not differ from others. A significant difference in the use of coercive measures was revealed between hospitals. Forced medication was the most frequent measure employed.

CONCLUSIONS

The study documented a south-north gradient in admission rate and indicated differences in the use of coercion. Variation may partly be due to different reporting procedures. This finding and why patients living in the neighborhood of hospitals stay longer should be explored in future studies.