ArticleBJPsych open2024
Comparison of coercive practices in worldwide mental healthcare: overcoming difficulties resulting from variations in monitoring strategies.
Article in BJPsych open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- Actual status of visitor and telephone restrictions for Japanese psychiatric inpatients: A retrospective observational study.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2026Article
- Psychiatric Care Pathways and the Use of Coercion: From Pre-Hospital to Inpatient Settings.Community mental health journal · 2026Article
- Human rights-based mental healthcare: new developments, introducing a themed series of papers.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- QualityRights in medical education to reduce coercion in mental health in Colombia: instrument validation and quasi-experimental study.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- Article
- Association between ward structural changes and coercive interventions in psychiatric emergency wards in Japan: a retrospective study.International journal of mental health systems · 2026Article
- Understanding compulsory community treatment across Australian jurisdictions: insights from three different data sources.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- Abolition of coercion in psychiatry on the horizon? A descriptive ecologic data study from six European countries.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2026Article
- Reporting of oral chemical restraint in the Mental Health Services Monthly Statistics for England.BJPsych bulletin · 2026Article
- Patients' experiences and perceptions of physical restraint in psychiatric care: A descriptive qualitative study at Muhimbili National Hospital.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Why deinstitutionalisation still matters: Reclaiming a contested horizon in global mental health.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- A longitudinal analysis of the prevalence of restrictive interventions involving women with mental health conditions, learning disabilities or autism in mental health services in England.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Fifty Years of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest: A Qualitative Exploration of Mental Health Staff's Perspectives.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
- Differentiating Therapeutic Responses That Reduce Restrictive Practice Use and Situational Aggression in an Acute Mental Health Unit.Journal of clinical nursing · 2025Article
- Behind closed doors: unlocking hospital variations in the use of seclusion and mechanical restraint - a nationwide multilevel analysis in adult mental healthcare in France.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- The contribution ofBJPsych open · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Prevalence of restraint use in psychiatric inpatient care facilities in India: A systematic review.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2025Review
- Article
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
backgroundCoercive or restrictive practices such as compulsory admission, involuntary medication, seclusion and restraint impinge on individual autonomy. International consensus mandates reduction or elimination of restrictive practices in mental healthcare. To achieve this requires knowledge of the extent of these practices.
aimsWe determined rates of coercive practices and compared them across countries.
methodWe identified nine country- or region-wide data-sets of rates and durations of restrictive practices in Australia, England, Germany, Ireland, Japan, New Zealand, The Netherlands, the USA and Wales. We compared the data-sets with each other and with mental healthcare indicators in World Health Organization and Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development reports.
resultsThe types and definitions of reported coercive practices varied considerably. Reported rates were highly variable, poorly reported and tracked using a diverse array of measures. However, we were able to combine duration measures to examine numbers of restrictive practices per year per 100 000 population for each country. The rates and durations of seclusion and restraint differed by factors of more than 100 between countries, with Japan showing a particularly high number of restraints.
conclusionsWe recommend a common set of international measures, so that finer comparisons within and between countries can be made, and monitoring of trends to see whether alternatives to restraint are successful. These measurements should include information about the total numbers, durations and rates of coercive measures. We urge the World Health Organization to include these measures in their Mental Health Atlas.
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.