Department of Nursing Science, Faculty of Medicine, 20014 University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
School of Nursing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China.
BMC Psychiatry. 2019 Jul 26;19(1):230. doi: 10.1186/s12888-019-2200-x.
Coercive measures is a topic that has long been discussed in the field of psychiatry. Despite global reports of reductions in the use of restraint episodes due to new regulations, it is still questionable if practices have really changed over time. For this study, we examined the rates of coercive measures in the inpatient population of psychiatric care providers across Finland to identify changing trends as well as variations in such trends by region.
In this nationwide registry analysis, we extracted patient data from the national database (The Finnish National Care Register for Health Care) over a 20-year period. We included adult patients admitted to psychiatric units (care providers) and focused on patients who had faced coercive measures (seclusion, limb restraints, forced injection and physical restraints) during their hospital stay. Multilevel logistical models (a polynomial model of quadratic form) were used to examine trends in prevalence of any coercive measures as well as the other four specified coercive measures over time, and to investigate variation in such trends among care providers and regions.
Between 1995 and 2014, the dataset contained 226,948 inpatients who had been admitted during the 20-year time frame (505,169 treatment periods). The overall prevalence of coercive treatment on inpatients was 9.8%, with a small decrease during 2011-2014. The overall prevalence of seclusion, limb restraints, forced injection and physical restraints on inpatients was 6.9, 3.8, 2.6 and 0.8%, respectively. Only the use of limb restraints showed a downward trend over time. Geographic and care provider variations in specific coercive measures used were also observed.
Despite the decreasing national level of coercive measures used in Finnish psychiatric hospitals, the overall reduction has been small during the last two decades. These results have implications on the future development of structured guidelines and interventions for preventing and more effectively managing challenging situations. Clinical guidelines and staff education related to the use of coercive measures should be critically assessed to ensure that the staff members working with vulnerable patient populations in psychiatric hospitals are ethically competent.
强制手段是精神病学领域长期讨论的话题。尽管全球报告称,由于新法规的实施,约束事件的使用有所减少,但实践是否随着时间的推移真正发生了变化仍值得怀疑。在这项研究中,我们检查了芬兰各地精神科医疗机构住院患者中强制手段的使用率,以确定变化趋势以及这些趋势在不同地区的差异。
在这项全国范围内的登记分析中,我们从国家数据库(芬兰国家医疗保健登记册)中提取了 20 年期间的患者数据。我们纳入了入住精神科病房的成年患者,并专注于在住院期间经历过强制手段(隔离、肢体约束、强制注射和身体约束)的患者。使用多水平逻辑模型(二次形式的多项式模型)来检查任何强制手段以及其他四种特定强制手段的流行率随时间的变化趋势,并调查这些趋势在医疗机构和地区之间的差异。
在 1995 年至 2014 年期间,数据集包含了 226948 名在 20 年时间框架内入院的患者(505169 个治疗期)。住院患者接受强制治疗的总体流行率为 9.8%,2011-2014 年略有下降。住院患者接受隔离、肢体约束、强制注射和身体约束的总体流行率分别为 6.9%、3.8%、2.6%和 0.8%。只有肢体约束的使用呈下降趋势。还观察到特定强制手段使用的地理和医疗机构差异。
尽管芬兰精神病院使用的强制手段的国家水平有所下降,但在过去二十年中总体减少幅度很小。这些结果对未来制定预防和更有效地管理挑战性情况的结构化指南和干预措施具有影响。应严格评估与强制手段使用相关的临床指南和员工教育,以确保在精神病院与弱势患者群体合作的工作人员在道德上有能力。