Ketelsen R, Schulz M, Driessen M
Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie in Bethel, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bielefeld, Bielefeld.
Gesundheitswesen. 2011 Feb;73(2):105-11. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1246181. Epub 2010 Feb 17.
Although coercive measures are one of the indicators for the quality of psychiatric in-patient care, reliable and valid data comparing the practices are hardly available. The purpose of this study was to analyse the incidence and duration of mechanical restraint and seclusion in psychiatric hospitals in Germany. We hypothesised that the duration of these coercive measures is associated not only with gender and diagnosis of the patients, but also with the clinics themselves.
Incidence and duration of coercive measures (mechanical restraint and seclusion) among patients in the year 2004 were analysed in six German psychiatric hospitals. Furthermore, the association of the length of these coercive measures with diagnosis, gender, and hospital was analysed using non-parametric statistical tests.
3.0% of 10,352 cases treated in 2004 were exposed to mechanical restraint and seclusion with a range from 1.9-7.4% on comparing the hospitals. On average, these measures were applied 3.7 times per patient (case) with each single intervention lasting 5.0 h (mean, range <0.1-290.8). The incidence and duration of coercive measures varied highly between different diagnostic groups and different hospitals. The length of these measures differed significantly between hospitals (p<0.001) and diagnoses (p<0.001). In patients with organic psychiatric disorders (ICD-10: F0) we observed the longest duration. Furthermore the duration of coercive measures in female patients was shorter than that for male patients (p<0.05).
Data interpretation should consider numerous confounding factors such as case mix and hospital characteristics. The handling of coercive measures is an important quality feature. Therefore standardised survey methods should be developed and nationwide implemented.
尽管强制手段是精神科住院护理质量的指标之一,但几乎没有可靠且有效的数据可用于比较相关做法。本研究的目的是分析德国精神病医院中机械约束和隔离的发生率及持续时间。我们假设这些强制手段的持续时间不仅与患者的性别和诊断有关,还与各诊所本身有关。
对德国六家精神病医院2004年患者中的强制手段(机械约束和隔离)的发生率及持续时间进行了分析。此外,使用非参数统计检验分析了这些强制手段的时长与诊断、性别及医院之间的关联。
2004年接受治疗的10352例病例中,3.0%的患者受到了机械约束和隔离,各医院之间的比例范围为1.9% - 7.4%。平均而言,这些措施每位患者(病例)使用3.7次,每次干预持续5.0小时(均值,范围<0.1 - 290.8)。强制手段的发生率和持续时间在不同诊断组和不同医院之间差异很大。这些措施的时长在医院之间(p<0.001)和诊断之间(p<0.001)存在显著差异。在患有器质性精神障碍(国际疾病分类第十版:F0)的患者中,我们观察到持续时间最长。此外,女性患者的强制手段持续时间短于男性患者(p<0.05)。
数据解读应考虑众多混杂因素,如病例组合和医院特征。强制手段的处理是一项重要的质量特征。因此,应制定标准化的调查方法并在全国范围内实施。