RESUMEN

Background: Interventions to prevent the use of coercion in psychiatric hospitals have been summarized in the 2018 German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Psychosomatic's comprehensive guidelines. Twelve recommendations for implementation of these guideline on psychiatric wards have been deducted and their feasibility has been tested in a pilot study, using external implementation consultants as facilitators. The objective of the PreVCo study was to test their effect in a randomised clinical trial. Methods: Fifty-four psychiatric wards in Germany treating voluntary and involuntary patients were randomly allocated to either an intervention or to a waiting list condition. The intervention consisted of the implementation of three out of 12 suggested recommendations as selected by the ward teams, supported by external study workers. As the primary outcome measure, the number of coercive measures used per bed and month in the final 3 months of the intervention period was determined. Secondary outcomes were the cumulative duration of coercive measures used per bed and months and assaults per bed and month. Achieved guideline adherence was measured by a fidelity scale developed for this purpose during a pilot study for the PreVCo Rating Tool. After a 3-month baseline collection period under routine conditions, randomisation was done after matching wards pairwise according to frequency of coercive measures used and scores on the PreVCo Rating Tool at baseline. The duration of the intervention period was 12 months; control wards received only an initial workshop presentation of the study and completed their PreVCo ratings. We used the Wilcoxon signed rank test and the paired t-test and conducted sensitivity analyses for different periods of observation. Findings: Neither the number of coercive measures used per month and bed nor their cumulative duration nor the number of assaults per bed and months differed significantly between the 27 intervention wards and the 27 control wards in the final 3 months of the intervention period. The median number of coercive measures used decreased by 45% (median 0.96 (IQR 1.34)-0.53 (IQR 0.59) from baseline until the end of the intervention period on the intervention wards and by 28% (median 0.98 (IQR 1.71)-0.71 (IQR 1.08) on waiting list wards. The PreVCo Rating Tool showed a significant improvement in intervention wards compared to control wards, indicating a successful implementation. Interpretation: The study demonstrated that guideline adherence could be significantly improved by the intervention. However, there was no evidence for an effect on the frequency or duration of coercive measures used. Spill-over effects and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-patient care might have limited the effect of the intervention. Further research from robust randomised controlled trials are necessary to identify effective interventions to reduce the use of coercion in psychiatric hospitals. Funding: The study was funded by the German Innovationsfonds beim Gemeinsamen Bundesausschuss (project no. 01VSF19037). The funder had no role in study design or data collection.

RESUMEN

Coercive measures (CM) in psychiatry adversely affect patients and efforts to minimize CM are steadily increasing. One area that has not been a strong focus of preventative efforts to date is the time of use of CM during hospitalization although previous research indicates that the admission situation and early hospitalization are times of increased risk for CM. This study therefore aims to contribute to the body of research in this field by analyzing in detail the times of use of CM and identifying patient characteristics serving as predictors for CM during early hospitalization. Using a large sample (N = 1556) of all cases admitted in 2019 via the emergency room at the Charité Department of Psychiatry at St. Hedwig Hospital in Berlin, this study supports previous research showing that the risk of CM is highest within the first 24 h h of hospitalization. Of 261 cases who experienced CM, 71.6% (n = 187) experienced a CM within the first 24 h of hospitalization and 54.4% (n = 142) of cases only experienced CM within the first 24 h of hospitalization and did not receive any CM after. Furthermore, this study identified significant predictors for the early use of CM during hospitalization including acute intoxication (p < .01), aggression (p < .01), male gender (p < .001) and limited communication ability (p < .001). The results highlight the importance of directing preventative efforts to minimize the use of CM not only to psychiatric units but also to mental health crisis response and to develop interventions specifically tailored to this time and patient groups at highest risk.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Coercive measures (CM) and involuntary admission to psychiatric treatment can have detrimental consequences for patients. Past research shows that certain clinical, treatment and admission-related characteristics put patients at a higher risk of experiencing CM and involuntary admission. Although of high societal importance, the association between patients' communication ability and CM and involuntary admission has not been subject of past research. To explicitly examine this association the authors conducted a retrospective study using data from patients admitted to psychiatric inpatient treatment via the emergency room at Charité St. Hedwig Hospital, Berlin in 2019. As independent variable, communication ability at admission was recorded (perfect; limited due to language or other reasons; impossible due to language or other reasons) along with possibly confounding variables including demographic, clinical and admission-related details. As dependent variables, involuntary admission and CM were recorded. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted examining the association between communication ability and involuntary admission and CM. In a sample of N = 1556, controlling for potential confounders, limited (OR = 3.08; p = .004) or no communication ability (OR = 4.02; p = .003) due to language barrier or limited (OR = 3.10; p < .001) or no communication ability (OR = 13.71; p < .001) due to other factors were significant predictors for involuntary admission. Limited communication ability due to language barrier (OR = 4.53; p < .001) and limited (OR = 1.58; p = .034) and no communication ability (OR = 3.55; p < .001) due to other factors were significant predictors for CM. These findings show that patients impaired in their communication ability are at higher risk of involuntary admission and CM and highlight the urgency of implementing appropriate interventions facilitating communication during admission and treatment.

Asunto(s)