Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41684113›Full record

ArticleEuropean psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists2026

Abolition of coercion in psychiatry on the horizon? A descriptive ecologic data study from six European countries.

Tilman Steinert, Anna Björkdahl, Erich Flammer, Kathryn Fradley, Alina Haines-Delmont, Sophie Hirsch, Lars Kjellin, Jorun Rugkasa, Joachim Scharfetter, Dirk Richter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Tilman SteinertCentres for Psychiatry Suedwuerttemberg, https://ror.org/032000t02Ulm University: Universitat Ulm, Ravensburg, Germany.
Anna BjörkdahlCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, https://ror.org/056d84691Karolinska Institutet & Stockholm Healthcare Services, Region Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9350-7844
Erich Flammerhttps://ror.org/05q7twd40Centres for Psychiatry Suedwuerttemberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8788-5176
Kathryn FradleySchool of Nursing and Public Health, https://ror.org/02hstj355Manchester Metropolitan University - All Saints Campus: Manchester Metropolitan, UK.
Alina Haines-DelmontSchool of Nursing and Public Health, https://ror.org/02hstj355Manchester Metropolitan University, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6989-0943
Sophie Hirschhttps://ror.org/032000t02University of Ulm: Universitat Ulm, Centres for Psychiatry Suedwuerttemberg, Biberach, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1012-0853
Lars KjellinUniversity Health Care Research Center, https://ror.org/05kytsw45Orebro University: Orebro Universitet, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4565-8864
Jorun Rugkasahttps://ror.org/04q12yn84Oslo Metropolitan University Faculty of Health Sciences: OsloMet - Storbyunivers, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-5842-2845
Joachim Scharfetterhttps://ror.org/02cm3s998Klinik Donaustadt, Vienna, Austria.
Dirk RichterPsychiatry, https://ror.org/02bnkt322Bern University of Applied Sciences: Berner Fachhochschule, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the last decade, UN bodies and the WHO call for the abolition of coercion in psychiatry. Studies provide some evidence for interventions to reduce the use of coercion, but it is unclear whether the use of coercion is decreasing in real-world practice. The aim of this study was to gather longitudinal ecologic data on the use of coercive interventions in European countries and to depict trends over time.

methodsFor each country, inclusion required access to ecologic datasets spanning a minimum of four years, pertain to a defined population (country or federal state level), and allowing the necessary elements to calculate both the proportion of psychiatric admissions affected by involuntary admissions (IAs) and coercive measures (CMs) and the rate per 100,000 inhabitants. Country experts were accessed via a European network of experts (FOSTREN group).

resultsData were obtained from Austria, England, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland, and covered periods between 4 and 10 years. In no country, an absolute decrease in IA and the use of CM could be observed. Rates of IA per 100,000 inhabitants changed between -5.4% (Sweden) and +37% (Germany). Rates of admissions exposed to any kind of CM changed between +11% (Austria) and +86% (Norway).

conclusionsThe findings suggest a persistence or rise in coercive practices despite national and international policy commitments. An increase in involuntary admissions suggests reasons outside psychiatric hospitals, whereas a disproportionate increase in coercive measures may indicate a change of practice in in-patient psychiatry. Further research is needed to explore the reasons from clinical and societal perspectives.

Indexed as

CoercionCommitment of Persons with Psychiatric DisordersMental DisordersPsychiatryEuropeHumansInvoluntary Commitmentcoercioninvoluntary admissionlongitudinalrestraintseclusion

Identifiers

PMID41684113
PMCPMC12978992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.