Cargando…

Seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception?

BACKGROUND: Coercive measures continue to be an important topic in psychiatry. However, there is no proof of the effectiveness of the use of coercive measures, especially with suicidal people. For many years, attempts have been made to replace such measures with alternative noncoercive intervention...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gavrilovic Haustein, Natalija, Freudiger, Maurice, Hunziker, Anna, Hepp, Urs, Jellestad, Lena, von Känel, Roland, Stulz, Niklaus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35752775
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-04076-x
_version_ 1784735890079219712
author Gavrilovic Haustein, Natalija
Freudiger, Maurice
Hunziker, Anna
Hepp, Urs
Jellestad, Lena
von Känel, Roland
Stulz, Niklaus
author_facet Gavrilovic Haustein, Natalija
Freudiger, Maurice
Hunziker, Anna
Hepp, Urs
Jellestad, Lena
von Känel, Roland
Stulz, Niklaus
author_sort Gavrilovic Haustein, Natalija
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Coercive measures continue to be an important topic in psychiatry. However, there is no proof of the effectiveness of the use of coercive measures, especially with suicidal people. For many years, attempts have been made to replace such measures with alternative noncoercive intervention options. This paper aims to clarify the situation of coercive measures, more precisely seclusions, in a general psychiatric hospital in Switzerland. It focuses on compulsory measures in patients with suicidal tendencies. METHOD: In this single-centre retrospective cohort study, we used routinely collected medical data and performed qualitative analyses of medical histories to examine whether alternative measures to seclusion had been offered and/or provided to patients who had been secluded solely because of suicidality. Patients were aged 18–65 years and had received inpatient treatment at one of five adult acute care units at a general psychiatric hospital in Switzerland between September 2016 and December 2019. RESULTS: There were 5,935 inpatient treatment cases during the study period. Suicidality was rated as “acute” or “very high” at least once during the hospitalization in 219 (3.7%) cases. Of these, 60 were excluded from further analyses as they involved seclusion, but suicidality was not the exclusive indication for this measure. Coercive seclusion was imposed exclusively due to suicidality in 53 (33.3%) of the remaining 159 cases, whereas 106 (66.7%) cases were not secluded. The rates of seclusion among suicidal patients varied considerably between the hospital wards (13.0% to 55.3%). Suicidal patients with non-Swiss residence status and/or lacking language skills were particularly prone to be secluded. Additionally, alternative interventions were offered and provided significantly more frequently in the nonsecluded patients. CONCLUSIONS: To avoid seclusion due to suicidal tendencies, it is necessary to have a general attitude of avoiding coercive measures at all costs. It is also important for qualified staff to be able to deal with challenging sociodemographic characteristics of patients such as foreign-language, which may require translators and intercultural interpreters.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9233814
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92338142022-06-27 Seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception? Gavrilovic Haustein, Natalija Freudiger, Maurice Hunziker, Anna Hepp, Urs Jellestad, Lena von Känel, Roland Stulz, Niklaus BMC Psychiatry Research BACKGROUND: Coercive measures continue to be an important topic in psychiatry. However, there is no proof of the effectiveness of the use of coercive measures, especially with suicidal people. For many years, attempts have been made to replace such measures with alternative noncoercive intervention options. This paper aims to clarify the situation of coercive measures, more precisely seclusions, in a general psychiatric hospital in Switzerland. It focuses on compulsory measures in patients with suicidal tendencies. METHOD: In this single-centre retrospective cohort study, we used routinely collected medical data and performed qualitative analyses of medical histories to examine whether alternative measures to seclusion had been offered and/or provided to patients who had been secluded solely because of suicidality. Patients were aged 18–65 years and had received inpatient treatment at one of five adult acute care units at a general psychiatric hospital in Switzerland between September 2016 and December 2019. RESULTS: There were 5,935 inpatient treatment cases during the study period. Suicidality was rated as “acute” or “very high” at least once during the hospitalization in 219 (3.7%) cases. Of these, 60 were excluded from further analyses as they involved seclusion, but suicidality was not the exclusive indication for this measure. Coercive seclusion was imposed exclusively due to suicidality in 53 (33.3%) of the remaining 159 cases, whereas 106 (66.7%) cases were not secluded. The rates of seclusion among suicidal patients varied considerably between the hospital wards (13.0% to 55.3%). Suicidal patients with non-Swiss residence status and/or lacking language skills were particularly prone to be secluded. Additionally, alternative interventions were offered and provided significantly more frequently in the nonsecluded patients. CONCLUSIONS: To avoid seclusion due to suicidal tendencies, it is necessary to have a general attitude of avoiding coercive measures at all costs. It is also important for qualified staff to be able to deal with challenging sociodemographic characteristics of patients such as foreign-language, which may require translators and intercultural interpreters. BioMed Central 2022-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9233814/ /pubmed/35752775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-04076-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Gavrilovic Haustein, Natalija
Freudiger, Maurice
Hunziker, Anna
Hepp, Urs
Jellestad, Lena
von Känel, Roland
Stulz, Niklaus
Seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception?
title Seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception?
title_full Seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception?
title_fullStr Seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception?
title_full_unstemmed Seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception?
title_short Seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception?
title_sort seclusion as a coercive measure in suicidality – daily routine or exception?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35752775
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-04076-x
work_keys_str_mv AT gavrilovichausteinnatalija seclusionasacoercivemeasureinsuicidalitydailyroutineorexception
AT freudigermaurice seclusionasacoercivemeasureinsuicidalitydailyroutineorexception
AT hunzikeranna seclusionasacoercivemeasureinsuicidalitydailyroutineorexception
AT heppurs seclusionasacoercivemeasureinsuicidalitydailyroutineorexception
AT jellestadlena seclusionasacoercivemeasureinsuicidalitydailyroutineorexception
AT vonkanelroland seclusionasacoercivemeasureinsuicidalitydailyroutineorexception
AT stulzniklaus seclusionasacoercivemeasureinsuicidalitydailyroutineorexception