Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Berlin Institute of Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt- Universität Zu Berlin, Campus Charité Mitte, Berlin, Germany.
Division of Adult Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Geneva University Hospitals, Ch. Du Petit-Bel-Air 2, Thônex, 1226, Switzerland.
BMC Psychiatry. 2023 Oct 2;23(1):712. doi: 10.1186/s12888-023-05192-y.
Subjective perception of coercion has gained attention as an important outcome. However, little is known about its relation to patients' appraisal of the justification of coercive measures. The present study aims to analyze the relationship between patients' appraisal of the justification of coercive measures and their level of perceived coercion.
This study presents a secondary analysis of the results of a multi-center RCT conducted to evaluate the effects of post-coercion review. Patients who experienced at least one coercive measure during their hospital stay were included in the trial. Participants' appraisal of the justification of coercive measures was categorized into patient-related and staff-related justifications. Subjective coercion was assessed using the Coercion Experience Scale (CES) and used as dependent variable in a multivariate regression model.
97 participants who completed the CES were included in the analysis. CES scores were significantly associated with the perception of the coercive measure as justified by staff-related factors (B = 0,540, p < 0,001), as well as with higher level of negative symptoms (B = 0,265, p = 0,011), and with mechanical restraint compared to seclusion (B=-0,343, p = 0,017).
Patients' perceptions of coercive measures as justified by staff-related factors such as arbitrariness or incompetence of staff are related to higher levels of perceived coercion. Multiprofessional efforts must be made to restrict the use of coercive measures and to ensure a transparent and sustainable decision-making process, particularly with patients showing high levels of negative symptoms. Such key elements should be part of all coercion reduction programs.
作为一个重要的结果,对强制的主观感知已经引起了关注。然而,人们对其与患者对强制措施合理性的评估之间的关系知之甚少。本研究旨在分析患者对强制措施合理性的评估与他们感知到的强制程度之间的关系。
本研究对一项多中心 RCT 的结果进行了二次分析,该 RCT 旨在评估强制审查后的效果。该试验纳入了在住院期间至少经历过一次强制措施的患者。参与者对强制措施合理性的评估分为与患者相关和与工作人员相关的理由。使用强制体验量表(CES)评估主观强制,并将其作为多元回归模型中的因变量。
97 名完成 CES 的参与者被纳入分析。CES 评分与工作人员相关因素认为强制措施合理的感知(B=0.540,p<0.001)显著相关,与较高水平的负面症状(B=0.265,p=0.011)以及与机械约束相比,与隔离(B=-0.343,p=0.017)相关。
患者对工作人员相关因素(如工作人员的任意性或无能)认为强制措施合理的感知与感知到的强制程度较高有关。必须采取多专业努力来限制强制措施的使用,并确保透明和可持续的决策过程,特别是对于表现出高水平负面症状的患者。这些关键要素应成为所有减少强制计划的一部分。