Christoffer Thomsen1,2, Liis Starkopf3, Lene Halling Hastrup4, Per Kragh Andersen3, Merete Nordentoft5, Michael Eriksen Benros5. 1. Mental Health Centre Frederiksberg, Copenhagen University Hospital, Ndr. Fasanvej 57, Frederiksberg, 2000, Copenhagen, Denmark. christoffer.torgaard.thomsen@regionh.dk. 2. Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. christoffer.torgaard.thomsen@regionh.dk. 3. Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Psychiatric Research Unit, Region Zealand, Denmark. 5. Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Reducing the use of coercion among patients with mental disorders has long been a political priority. However, risk factors for coercive measures have primarily been investigated in smaller studies. To reduce the use of coercion, it is crucial to identify people at risk which we aim to do in this first large-scale study. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted among all psychiatric inpatients in Denmark, following 112,233 individuals during 1999-2014. Data from Danish registers were analysed using logistic regression for repeated measures. RESULTS: 24,594 inpatients were exposed to a coercive measure (21.9%). Clinical characteristics were the foremost predictors of coercion and patients with organic mental disorder had the highest increased risk of being subjected to a coercive measure (OR = 5.56; 95% CI = 5.04, 6.14). The risk of coercion was the highest in the first admission and decreased with the number of admissions (all p < 0.001). The following socioeconomic variables were associated with an increased risk of coercion: male sex, unemployment, lower social class and immigrants from low and middle income countries (all p < 0.001). Early retirement and social relations, such as being married and having children, reduced the risk of being subjected to coercive measure (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: From our nationwide data, we identified a broad range of risk factors associated with coercive measures. Our findings can assist researchers in identifying patients at risk of coercion and thereby help targeting new coercion reduction programs.
PURPOSE: Reducing the use of coercion among patients with mental disorders has long been a political priority. However, risk factors for coercive measures have primarily been investigated in smaller studies. To reduce the use of coercion, it is crucial to identify people at risk which we aim to do in this first large-scale study. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted among all psychiatric inpatients in Denmark, following 112,233 individuals during 1999-2014. Data from Danish registers were analysed using logistic regression for repeated measures. RESULTS: 24,594 inpatients were exposed to a coercive measure (21.9%). Clinical characteristics were the foremost predictors of coercion and patients with organic mental disorder had the highest increased risk of being subjected to a coercive measure (OR = 5.56; 95% CI = 5.04, 6.14). The risk of coercion was the highest in the first admission and decreased with the number of admissions (all p < 0.001). The following socioeconomic variables were associated with an increased risk of coercion: male sex, unemployment, lower social class and immigrants from low and middle income countries (all p < 0.001). Early retirement and social relations, such as being married and having children, reduced the risk of being subjected to coercive measure (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: From our nationwide data, we identified a broad range of risk factors associated with coercive measures. Our findings can assist researchers in identifying patients at risk of coercion and thereby help targeting new coercion reduction programs.
Authors: Lucie Kalisova; Jiri Raboch; Alexander Nawka; Gaia Sampogna; Libor Cihal; Thomas W Kallert; Georgi Onchev; Anastasia Karastergiou; Valeria Del Vecchio; Andrzej Kiejna; Tomasz Adamowski; Francisco Torres-Gonzales; Jorge A Cervilla; Stephan Priebe; Domenico Giacco; Lars Kjellin; Algirdas Dembinskas; Andrea Fiorillo Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Manuela Silva; Ana Antunes; Sofia Azeredo-Lopes; Adriana Loureiro; Benedetto Saraceno; José Miguel Caldas-de-Almeida; Graça Cardoso Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst Date: 2021-04-20
Authors: Sahar Steiger; Julian Moeller; Julia F Sowislo; Roselind Lieb; Undine E Lang; Christian G Huber Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Shuo-Yen Ting; Tsuo-Hung Lan; Lih-Jong Shen; Chun-Yuan Lin; Shih-Kai Lee; Wei-Fen Ma Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-20 Impact factor: 4.614