Timon Elmer1, Franziska Rabenschlag2, Dominik Schori3, Gianfranco Zuaboni4, Bernd Kozel5, Susanne Jaeger6, Candelaria Mahlke7, Kolja Heumann7, Anastasia Theodoridou8, Matthias Jaeger8. 1. Department of Development and Research in Nursing, Therapies and Social Work, Psychiatric Hospitals of the University of Basel, Switzerland; Chair of Social Networks, Department of Humanities, Social and Political Sciences, ETH Zurich, Switzerland. 2. Department of Development and Research in Nursing, Therapies and Social Work, Psychiatric Hospitals of the University of Basel, Switzerland. Electronic address: Franziska.rabenschlag@upkbs.ch. 3. Directorate of Nursing, Therapies and Social Work, University Hospital of Psychiatry Zurich, Switzerland. 4. Department of Nursing Development, Private Clinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Kilchberg, Switzerland. 5. Nursing and Social Education Research Unit, University of Berne, Psychiatric Services, Berne, Switzerland. 6. Centers for Psychiatry Suedwuerttemberg, Clinic for Psychiatry und Psychotherapy I, University of Ulm, Germany. 7. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. 8. Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Centre for Acute Psychiatric Disorders, University Hospital of Psychiatry Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
AIMS: Informal coercion is a frequently used form of communication among mental health professionals to influence treatment outcomes. This study investigates the recognition, attitude, and application of different forms of informal coercion by mental health professionals. METHODS: Mental health professionals of five psychiatric institutions in Germany and Switzerland (n = 424) took part in an online survey assessing the recognition of, attitudes towards, and application of different forms of informal coercion. RESULTS: Mental health professionals did not recognize the extent of informal coercion adequately; especially stronger forms were underestimated. Recognition and application of informal coercion was predicted by attitudes towards coercion. Furthermore, there were differences between profession of participants regarding the recognition and application of informal coercion. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to realize that the extent of applied informal coercion in therapeutic communication is often not recognized by practitioners, although it might interfere with a sound therapeutic relationship.
AIMS: Informal coercion is a frequently used form of communication among mental health professionals to influence treatment outcomes. This study investigates the recognition, attitude, and application of different forms of informal coercion by mental health professionals. METHODS: Mental health professionals of five psychiatric institutions in Germany and Switzerland (n = 424) took part in an online survey assessing the recognition of, attitudes towards, and application of different forms of informal coercion. RESULTS: Mental health professionals did not recognize the extent of informal coercion adequately; especially stronger forms were underestimated. Recognition and application of informal coercion was predicted by attitudes towards coercion. Furthermore, there were differences between profession of participants regarding the recognition and application of informal coercion. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to realize that the extent of applied informal coercion in therapeutic communication is often not recognized by practitioners, although it might interfere with a sound therapeutic relationship.
Authors: Julia Stoll; Anna Lisa Westermair; Ulrike Kübler; Thomas Reisch; Katja Cattapan; René Bridler; Robert Maier; Manuel Trachsel Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 4.144
Authors: Thomas Reisch; Simone Beeri; Georges Klein; Philipp Meier; Philippe Pfeifer; Etienne Buehler; Florian Hotzy; Matthias Jaeger Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2018-10-26 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Daniel Schöttle; Friederike Ruppelt; Benno G Schimmelmann; Anne Karow; Alexandra Bussopulos; Jürgen Gallinat; Klaus Wiedemann; Daniel Luedecke; Anja Christine Rohenkohl; Christian G Huber; Thomas Bock; Martin Lambert Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2019-10-24 Impact factor: 4.157