Article

Why do some voluntary patients feel coerced into hospitalisation? A mixed-methods study

Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Psychiatry Research (Impact Factor: 2.68). 05/2011; 187(1-2):275-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2011.01.001
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study aimed to investigate factors linked to perceived coercion at admission and during treatment among voluntary inpatients. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Two hundred seventy patients were screened for perceived coercion at admission. Those who felt coerced into admission rated their perceived coercion during treatment a month after admission. Patient characteristics and experiences were tested as predictors of coercion. In-depth interviews on experiences leading to perceived coercion were conducted with 36 participants and analysed thematically. Thirty-four percent of patients felt coerced into admission and half of those still felt coerced a month later. No patient characteristics were associated with perceived coercion. Those whose satisfaction with treatment increased more markedly between baseline and a month later were less likely to feel coerced a month after admission. In the qualitative interviews three themes leading to perceived coercion were identified: viewing the hospital as ineffective and other treatments as more appropriate, not participating in the admission and treatment and not feeling respected. Involving patients in the decision-making and treating them with respect may reduce perceived coercion.

Full-text

Available from: Stefan Priebe, Sep 09, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
138 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Psychiatric staff members have the power to decide the options that frame encounters with patients. Intentional as well as unintentional framing can have a crucial impact on patients' opportunities to be heard and participate in the process. We identified three dominant ethical perspectives in the normative medical ethics literature concerning how doctors and other staff members should frame interactions in relation to patients; paternalism, autonomy and reciprocity. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse statements describing real work situations and ethical reflections made by staff members in relation to three central perspectives in medical ethics; paternalism, autonomy and reciprocity. All staff members involved with patients in seven adult psychiatric and six child and adolescent psychiatric clinics were given the opportunity to freely describe ethical considerations in their work by keeping an ethical diary over the course of one week and 173 persons handed in their diaries. Qualitative theory-guided content analysis was used to provide a description of staff encounters with patients and in what way these encounters were consistent with, or contrary to, the three perspectives. The majority of the statements could be attributed to the perspective of paternalism and several to autonomy. Only a few statements could be attributed to reciprocity, most of which concerned staff members acting contrary to the perspective. The result is presented as three perspectives containing eight values.Paternalism; 1) promoting and restoring the health of the patient, 2) providing good care and 3) assuming responsibility.Autonomy; 1) respecting the patient's right to self-determination and information, 2) respecting the patient's integrity and 3) protecting human rights.Reciprocity; 1) involving patients in the planning and implementation of their care and 2) building trust between staff and patients. Paternalism clearly appeared to be the dominant perspective among the participants, but there was also awareness of patients' right to autonomy. Despite a normative trend towards reciprocity in psychiatry throughout the Western world, identifying it proved difficult in this study. This should be borne in mind by clinics when considering the need for ethical education, training and supervision.
    BMC Medical Ethics 12/2013; 14(1):49. DOI:10.1186/1472-6939-14-49 · 1.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Whilst formal coercion in psychiatry is regulated by legislation, other interventions that are often referred to as informal coercion are less regulated. It remains unclear to what extent these interventions are, and how they are used, in mental healthcare. This paper aims to identify the attitudes and experiences of mental health professionals towards the use of informal coercion across countries with differing sociocultural contexts. Focus groups with mental health professionals were conducted in ten countries with different sociocultural contexts (Canada, Chile, Croatia, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Norway, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom). Five common themes were identified: (a) a belief that informal coercion is effective; (b) an often uncomfortable feeling using it; (c) an explicit as well as (d) implicit dissonance between attitudes and practice-with wider use of informal coercion than is thought right in theory; (e) a link to principles of paternalism and responsibility versus respect for the patient's autonomy. A disapproval of informal coercion in theory is often overridden in practice. This dissonance occurs across different sociocultural contexts, tends to make professionals feel uneasy, and requires more debate and guidance.
    Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s00127-015-1032-3 · 2.58 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Coerced admission to psychiatric hospitals, defined by legal status or patient's subjective experience, is common. Evidence on clinical outcomes however is limited. This study aimed to assess symptom change over a three month period following coerced admission and identify patient characteristics associated with outcomes. At study sites in 11 European countries consecutive legally involuntary patients and patients with a legally voluntary admission who however felt coerced, were recruited and assessed by independent researchers within the first week after admission. Symptoms were assessed on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Patients were re-assessed after one and three months. The total sample consisted of 2326 legally coerced patients and 764 patients with a legally voluntary admission who felt coerced. Symptom levels significantly improved over time. In a multivariable analysis, higher baseline symptoms, being unemployed, living alone, repeated hospitalisation, being legally a voluntary patient but feeling coerced, and being initially less satisfied with treatment were all associated with less symptom improvement after one month and, other than initial treatment satisfaction, also after three months. The diagnostic group was not linked with outcomes. On average patients show significant but limited symptom improvements after coerced hospital admission, possibly reflecting the severity of the underlying illnesses. Social factors, but not the psychiatric diagnosis, appear important predictors of outcomes. Legally voluntary patients who feel coerced may have a poorer prognosis than legally involuntary patients and deserve attention in research and clinical practice.
    PLoS ONE 11/2011; 6(11):e28191. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0028191 · 3.53 Impact Factor