Coerced Hospital Admission and Symptom Change-A Prospective Observational Multi-Centre Study

PMCID: PMC3227658 Freely available online via CCplosone.org

Gender differences in coerced patients with schizophrenia

European Commission (Quality of life and Management of Living Resources Programme, contract number QLG4-CT- 2002-01036), Czech Ministry of Education research grant MSM002160849, and research grants PRVOUK–P26/LF1/4 and PRVOUK–P03/LF1/

Psichodiagnostinių tyrimų taikymas ekspertinėje praktikoje

The aim of this study is to analyse the peculiarities of the work methods of a forensic psychologist as well as to evaluate the practical demand for psychological evaluation in perspective. The problem analysed is the integration of normative (quantitative) and interpretive (qualitative) research strategies in forensic psychologist activity. Having analysed legal expert documentation, scientific psychological evaluation literature and the results of forensic psychologist practice, the following conclusions were drawn: 1. The methodical complexity of psychological research of forensic psychologists depends on the type of forensic examination: a single-person forensic psychology examination or a psychological research in the framework of forensic psychiatry. 2. In the context of forensic psychiatry, psychological tests have the characteristics of interpreting paradigm, case study and quality research, the variety of which depends on the aims of the client. 3. The prospective task of forensic psychologists is to provide special knowledge on the assumptions of the individual psychological peculiarities of a person, including the presumptions for maturity and possible behaviour correction, which may render beneficial to court in deciding the limits of criminal liability and sentence

Use of Coercive Measures During Involuntary Hospitalization: Findings From Ten European Countries

OBJECTIVE:Involuntary treatment in mental health care is a sensitive but rarely studied issue. This study was part of the European Evaluation of Coercion in Psychiatry and Harmonization of Best Clinical Practice (EUNOMIA) project. It assessed and compared the use of coercive measures in psychiatric inpatient facilities in ten European countries. METHODS:The sample included 2,030 involuntarily admitted patients. Data were obtained on coercive measures (physical restraint, seclusion, and forced medication). RESULTS:In total, 1,462 coercive measures were used with 770 patients (38%). The percentage of patients receiving coercive measures in each country varied between 21% and 59%. The most frequent reason for prescribing coercive measures was patient aggression against others. In eight of the countries, the most frequent measure used was forced medication, and in two of the countries mechanical restraint was the most frequent measure used. Seclusion was rarely administered and was reported in only six countries. A diagnosis of schizophrenia and more severe symptoms were associated with a higher probability of receiving coercive measures. CONCLUSIONS:Coercive measures were used in a substantial group of involuntarily admitted patients across Europe. Their use appeared to depend on diagnosis and the severity of illness, but use was also heavily influenced by the individual country. Variation across countries may reflect differences in societal attitudes and clinical traditions

The EUNOMIA project on coercion in psychiatry: study design and preliminary data

Previous national research has shown significant variation in several aspects of coercive treatment measures in psychiatry. The EUNOMIA project, an international study funded by the European Commission, aims to assess the clinical practice of these measures and their outcomes. Its naturalistic and epidemiological design is being implemented at 13 centres in 12 European countries. This article describes the design of the study and provides preliminary data on the catchment areas, staff, available facilities and modalities of care at the participating centres