ArticleDeutsches Arzteblatt international2023
Joint Crisis Plans and Crisis Cards in Inpatient Psychiatric Treatment—a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
Article in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Supported Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Evidence on the Outcomes for People With Mental Ill Health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Pooled it
- Whose voice is heard? Mental health professionals' involvement, epistemic injustice, and the ethics of psychiatric advance directives.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- [Comparative Study of Community-Based Management Models of Schizophrenia at Home and Abroad].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025Article
- Advance directives in patients with schizophrenia.CNS spectrums · 2024Review
- Developing and testing Advance Choice Document implementation resources for Black African and Caribbean people with experience of compulsory psychiatric admission.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Advance statements in mental healthcare: time to close the evidence to practice gap.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2023Article
- Implementation of guidelines on prevention of coercion and violence (PreVCo) in psychiatry: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundJoint Crisis Plans (JCP) and crisis cards (CC) are both instruments designed to improve the management of future psychiatric crisis situations, but they differ, for example, in terms of resource use, legal validity, and aims. International research findings for JCP are inconsistent.
methodsFrom January 2018 to December 2020, a single-blinded, two-armed multicenter RCT was carried out, with assessments at T0 (baseline) and T1 (18 months later). The patients included had schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and were aged between 18 and 62 years. The primary outcome was the cumulative duration of inpatient treatment (voluntary/involuntary), and coercive measures comprised the secondary outcome. Trial registration: DRKS00013985.
resultsOf the 266 study participants, 157 completed the study. In the CC group 57.8% and in the JCP group 64.9% were admitted to psychiatric hospitals between the index treatment and T1 (p = 0.367); 8.4% of the CC group and 12.2% of the JPC group were admitted against their will (p = 0.441). The cumulative treatment duration was not significantly shorter (p = 0.631) in the JPC group (mean 42.43 days, SD = 48.60) than in the CC group (50.16 days, SD = 74.16). Thus, JPCs did not achieve the expected improvement with regard to the primary endpoint. There were also no relevant differences regarding the secondary endpoint. Major effects in favor of the JCP were observed, however, in patients' development of conficence in the treatment teams and in their active participation in the treatment procedure.
conclusionAlthough the study showed no superiority of JCP over CC with regard to the primary and secondary outcomes, JCP should be used more frequently in routine practice as an intervention to support a participative approach to treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.