Emanuele Valenti1, Domenico Giacco2. 1. Centre for Ethics in Medicine, Bristol Medical School, Population Health School Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Bristol, BS8 2 PS, UK. emanuele.valenti@bristol.ac.uk. 2. Department of Mental Health and Wellbeing, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV 7, AL, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Influence strategies such as persuasion and interpersonal leverage are used in mental health care to influence patient behaviour and improve treatment adherence. One ethical concern about using such strategies is that they may constitute coercive behaviour ("informal coercion") and negatively impact patient satisfaction and the quality of care. However, some influence strategies may affect patients' perceptions, so an umbrella definition of "informal coercion" may be unsatisfactory. Furthermore, previous research indicates that professionals also perceive dissonance between theoretical explanations of informal coercion and their behaviours in clinical practice. This study analysed mental health professionals' (MHPs) views and the perceived ethical implications of influence strategies in community care. METHODS: Qualitative secondary data analysis of a focus group study was used to explore the conflict between theoretical definitions and MHPs' experiences concerning the coerciveness of influence strategies. Thirty-six focus groups were conducted in the main study, with 227 MHPs from nine countries participating. RESULTS: The findings indicate that not all the influence strategies discussed with participants can be defined as "informal coercion", but they become coercive when they imply the use of a lever, have the format of a conditional offer and when the therapeutic proposal is not a patient's free choice but is driven by professionals. MHPs are rarely aware of these tensions within their everyday practice; consequently, it is possible that coercive practices are inadvertently being used, with no standard regarding their application. Our findings suggest that levers and the type of leverage used in communications with the patient are also relevant to differentiating leveraged and non-leveraged influence. CONCLUSION: Our findings may help mental health professionals working in community care to identify and discuss influence strategies that may lead to unintended coercive practices.
BACKGROUND: Influence strategies such as persuasion and interpersonal leverage are used in mental health care to influence patient behaviour and improve treatment adherence. One ethical concern about using such strategies is that they may constitute coercive behaviour ("informal coercion") and negatively impact patient satisfaction and the quality of care. However, some influence strategies may affect patients' perceptions, so an umbrella definition of "informal coercion" may be unsatisfactory. Furthermore, previous research indicates that professionals also perceive dissonance between theoretical explanations of informal coercion and their behaviours in clinical practice. This study analysed mental health professionals' (MHPs) views and the perceived ethical implications of influence strategies in community care. METHODS: Qualitative secondary data analysis of a focus group study was used to explore the conflict between theoretical definitions and MHPs' experiences concerning the coerciveness of influence strategies. Thirty-six focus groups were conducted in the main study, with 227 MHPs from nine countries participating. RESULTS: The findings indicate that not all the influence strategies discussed with participants can be defined as "informal coercion", but they become coercive when they imply the use of a lever, have the format of a conditional offer and when the therapeutic proposal is not a patient's free choice but is driven by professionals. MHPs are rarely aware of these tensions within their everyday practice; consequently, it is possible that coercive practices are inadvertently being used, with no standard regarding their application. Our findings suggest that levers and the type of leverage used in communications with the patient are also relevant to differentiating leveraged and non-leveraged influence. CONCLUSION: Our findings may help mental health professionals working in community care to identify and discuss influence strategies that may lead to unintended coercive practices.
Authors: Annalee Johnson-Kwochka; Elizabeth Carpenter-Song; Ida Griesemer; Cara Nikolajski; Nancy Parrotta; Kim L MacDonald-Wilson Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Stephanie Meyer; Eva Cignacco; Settimio Monteverde; Manuel Trachsel; Luigi Raio; Stephan Oelhafen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-02-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Scott Weich; Craig Duncan; Kamaldeep Bhui; Alastair Canaway; David Crepaz-Keay; Patrick Keown; Jason Madan; Orla McBride; Graham Moon; Helen Parsons; Swaran Singh; Liz Twigg Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-10-18 Impact factor: 2.692