In Norway there are substantial regional differences in the use of coercive measures in mental health care. There is also variation in use of coercion between mental health care institutions. At present Norwegian authorities are revising an Action Plan from 2006, aiming to reduce the use of coercion and to improve the quality of mental health services when coersive measures are used in accordance with the mental health act.
In this systematic review interventions intended to reduce the use of coercive measures in mental health services for adults have been examined.
Main findings:
- Joint crisis plans may reduce the number of compulsory admissions, but the documentation was of low quality.
- Systematic evaluation of aggressive behaviour in patients admitted to an acute psychiatric ward, may reduce the use of restraint and seclusion, but the documentation was of low quality.
- For the other interventions conclusions could not be drawn.
Further research is needed in order to draw more robust conclusions about the effect of interventions intended to reduce coercive measures, seclusion and restraint, in mental health servies for adults.
We included 12 studies. None of the included studies were conducted in Norway. However, the studies examined the effect of interventions that are used in Norway, such as joint crisis plans, risk assessment, Assertive Community Treatment teams (ACT-teams), crisis resolution teams, and use of written patient contracts, such as booklets containing treatment options.
Preliminary version: HTML in process
- NLM CatalogRelated NLM Catalog Entries
- Review Interventions for Reducing Seclusion and Restraint in Mental Health Care for Adults: A Systematic Review[ 2017]Review Interventions for Reducing Seclusion and Restraint in Mental Health Care for Adults: A Systematic ReviewDahm KT, Steiro AK, Leiknes KA, Husum TL, Kirkehei I, Dalsbø TK, Brurberg KG. 2017 Dec 19
- Methodological issues in monitoring the use of coercive measures.[Int J Law Psychiatry. 2011]Methodological issues in monitoring the use of coercive measures.Janssen WA, van de Sande R, Noorthoorn EO, Nijman HL, Bowers L, Mulder CL, Smit A, Widdershoven GA, Steinert T. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2011 Nov-Dec; 34(6):429-38. Epub 2011 Nov 12.
- Review Risk factors associated with use of coercive practices in adult mental health inpatients: A systematic review.[J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. ...]Review Risk factors associated with use of coercive practices in adult mental health inpatients: A systematic review.Beames L, Onwumere J. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2022 Apr; 29(2):220-239. Epub 2021 Apr 20.
- [Changes in the use of compulsory measures in Norwegian psychiatric institutions].[Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1994][Changes in the use of compulsory measures in Norwegian psychiatric institutions].Høyer G, Drange H. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1994 Feb 20; 114(5):585-8.
- Effect of joint crisis plans on use of compulsory treatment in psychiatry: single blind randomised controlled trial.[BMJ. 2004]Effect of joint crisis plans on use of compulsory treatment in psychiatry: single blind randomised controlled trial.Henderson C, Flood C, Leese M, Thornicroft G, Sutherby K, Szmukler G. BMJ. 2004 Jul 17; 329(7458):136. Epub 2004 Jul 7.
- Interventions for Reducing Seclusion and Restraint in Mental Health for AdultsInterventions for Reducing Seclusion and Restraint in Mental Health for Adults
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...