Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, München, Germany.
kbo Isar-Amper-Klinikum München Ost, Haar, Germany.
Eur Psychiatry. 2020 Sep 28;63(1):e90. doi: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2020.88.
BACKGROUND: The present study aimed at answering three research questions: (a) Does shared decision making (SDM) yield similar effects for patients with involuntary admission or incidents of aggression compared to patients with voluntary admission or without incidents of aggression? (b) Does SDM reduce the number of patients with incidents of aggression and the use of coercive measures? (c) Does the use of coercion have a negative impact on patients' perceived involvement in decision making? METHODS: We used data from the cluster-randomized SDM-PLUS trial in which patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in 12 acute psychiatric wards of 4 German psychiatric hospitals either received an SDM-intervention or treatment as usual. In addition, data on aggression and coercive measures were retrospectively obtained from patients' records. RESULTS: The analysis included n = 305 inpatients. Patient aggression as well as coercive measures mostly took place in the first days of the inpatient stay and were seldom during the study phase of the SDM-PLUS trial.Patients who had been admitted involuntarily or showed incidents of aggression profited similarly from the intervention with regard to perceived involvement, adherence, and treatment satisfaction compared to patients admitted voluntarily or without incidents of aggression. The intervention showed no effect on patient aggression and coercive measures. Having previously experienced coercive measures did not predict patients' rating of perceived involvement. CONCLUSION: Further research should focus on SDM-interventions taking place in the very first days of inpatients treatment and potential beneficial long effects of participatory approaches that may not be measurable during the current inpatient stay.
背景:本研究旨在回答三个研究问题:(a)与自愿入院或无攻击事件的患者相比,共同决策(SDM)对非自愿入院或有攻击事件的患者是否产生类似效果?(b)SDM 是否会减少攻击事件的发生次数和强制性措施的使用?(c)使用强制性措施是否会对患者对决策的参与程度产生负面影响?
方法:我们使用了来自 SDM-PLUS 试验的集群随机对照数据,该试验纳入了来自德国 4 家精神病院的 12 个急性精神科病房的 305 名精神分裂症或分裂情感障碍患者,这些患者要么接受 SDM 干预,要么接受常规治疗。此外,还从患者病历中回顾性地获取了关于攻击和强制性措施的数据。
结果:分析纳入了 305 名住院患者。患者攻击行为和强制性措施主要发生在住院的最初几天,而在 SDM-PLUS 试验的研究阶段很少发生。与自愿入院或无攻击事件的患者相比,非自愿入院或有攻击事件的患者从干预中同样受益于参与度、依从性和治疗满意度。干预对患者的攻击行为和强制性措施没有影响。以前曾经历过强制性措施并不能预测患者对参与度的评价。
结论:进一步的研究应侧重于在住院治疗的最初几天进行 SDM 干预,以及参与性方法的潜在有益长期效果,这些效果可能在当前的住院期间无法衡量。
Eur Psychiatry. 2020-9-28
Neuropsychiatr. 2018-12
BMC Psychiatry. 2010-6-28
Psychiatry Res. 2013-10-28
Front Psychiatry. 2024-9-27
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021-8-5
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2016-4
Psychiatr Serv. 2014-12-1
Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2014-5
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2013-1-4