ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2016
Subjective experience of coercion in psychiatric care: a study comparing the attitudes of patients and healthy volunteers towards coercive methods and their justification.
Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Variables Associated With the Subjective Experience of Coercive Measures in Psychiatric Inpatients: A Systematic Review.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2018Pooled it
- Relationship between perceived coercion and perceived justification of coercive measures - secondary analysis of a randomized-controlled trial.BMC psychiatry · 2023Trial
- The ethics of mandated inpatient mental healthcare: The consumer perspective.Nursing ethics · 2026Article
- Examining the Association Between Perceived Quality of Care and Experienced Coercion Among Patients in Acute Mental Health Units in Spain: A National Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Article
- Experiences of coercion amongst involuntary mental health care users in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- [Association between substance use and coercive measures on psychiatric wards].Der Nervenarzt · 2022Article
- Inhaled Loxapine for the Management of Acute Agitation in Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia: Expert Review and Commentary in an Era of Change.Drugs in R&D · 2019Review
- [Coercive interventions: historical summary and review of subjective experience].Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater · 2018Review
- Neurobiological background of borderline personality disorder, PTSD and ADHD.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2016Article
- Article
- One-year incidence and prevalence of seclusion: Dutch findings in an international perspective.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Under certain conditions, coercive interventions in psychotic patients can help to regain insight and alleviate symptoms, but can also traumatize subjects. This study explored attitudes towards psychiatric coercive interventions in healthy individuals and persons suffering from schizophrenia, schizoaffective or bipolar disorder. The impact of personal history of coercive treatment on preferences concerning clinical management of patients unable to consent was investigated. Six case vignettes depicting scenarios of ethical dilemmas and demanding decisions in favour of or against coercive interventions were presented to 60 healthy volunteers and 90 patients. Structured interviews focusing on experienced coercion were performed in conjunction with the Coercion Experience Scale and the Admission Experience Survey. Symptom severity, psychosocial functioning and insight into illness were assessed as influencing variables. Student's t tests compared patients' and controls' judgments, followed by regression analyses to define the predictive value of symptoms and measures of coercion on judgments regarding the total patient sample and patients with experience of fixation. Patients and non-psychiatric controls showed no significant difference in their attitudes towards involuntary admission and forced medication. Conversely, patients more than controls significantly disapproved of mechanical restraint. Subjective experience of coercive interventions played an important role for the justification of treatment against an individual's "natural will". Factors influencing judgments on coercion were overall functioning and personal experience of treatment effectiveness and fairness. Qualitative and quantitative aspects of perceived coercion, in addition to insight into illness, predicted judgments of previously fixated patients. Results underline the importance of the quality of practical implementation and care, if coercive interventions cannot be avoided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25900468What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.