Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Original article

Vol. 148 No. 3536 (2018)

Coercion in substance use disorders: clinical course of compulsory admissions in a Swiss psychiatric hospital

  • Benedikt Habermeyer
  • Lea Wyder
  • Patrik Roser
  • Marc Vogel
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2018.14644
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2018;148:w14644
Published
06.09.2018

Summary

According to the Swiss legal system, involuntary admission is one of the farthest-reaching incursions into personal autonomy. The effect of compulsory admission in treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs) on variables such as length of stay or leaving treatment before recommended discharge remains elusive. In order to elucidate these effects, we retrospectively analysed the clinical course of treatment of 608 patients who were admitted between November 2016 and October 2017 to the Department of Addictive Disorders of the canton of Aargau.

Involuntarily admitted patients showed lower health and social functioning, as measured by the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS), compared with those with voluntary status. In involuntary admissions for SUD treatment, length of stay was significantly shorter and the proportion of patients who left treatment against recommendation was twice as high as in voluntarily admitted patients. Furthermore, if treatment was initiated on a compulsory basis, a subsequent switch to voluntary treatment status appeared to be very uncommon. We conclude that, at least in involuntary admission according to the Swiss legal system, these admissions do not lead to sustained inpatient treatment.

References

  1. Steinert T, Fallgatter A. Psychiatrie mit offenen Türen. Psychiatr Prax. 2016;43(8):452–4. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-119111
  2. Muralidharan S, Fenton M. Containment strategies for people with serious mental illness. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;(3):CD002084.
  3. Lang UE, Hartmann S, Schulz-Hartmann S, Gudlowski Y, Ricken R, Munk I, et al. Do locked doors in psychiatric hospitals prevent patients from absconding? Eur J Psychiatry. 2010;24(4):199–204. doi:.https://doi.org/10.4321/S0213-61632010000400001
  4. Sollberger D, Lang UE. Psychiatrie mit offenen Türen. Teil 1: Rational für Türöffnungen in der Akutpsychiatrie [Psychiatry with open doors. Part 1: Rational for an open door for acute psychiatry]. Nervenarzt. 2014;85(3):312–8. Article in German. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-013-3769-9
  5. Jungfer H-A, Schneeberger AR, Borgwardt S, Walter M, Vogel M, Gairing SK, et al. Reduction of seclusion on a hospital-wide level: successful implementation of a less restrictive policy. J Psychiatr Res. 2014;54:94–9. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.03.020
  6. Lang UE, Walter M, Borgwardt S, Heinz A. Über die Reduktion von Zwangsmaßnahmen durch eine “offene Türpolitik” [About the Reduction of Compulsory Measures by an “Open Door Policy”]. Psychiatr Prax. 2016;43(6):299–301. Article in German. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-111032
  7. Hotzy F, Moetteli S, Theodoridou A, Schneeberger AR, Seifritz E, Hoff P, et al. Clinical course and prevalence of coercive measures: an observational study among involuntarily hospitalised psychiatric patients. Swiss Med Wkly. 2018;148:w14616. doi:.https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2018.14616
  8. Art ZGB. 426 Das Familienrecht Der Erwachsenenschutz Die behördlichen Massnahmen Die fürsorgerische Unterbringung [Internet]. [cited 2018 Jan 16]. Available from: https://zgb.gesetzestext.ch/artikel.cfm?key=493&art=Der_Erwachsenenschutz
  9. Schweizerisches Zivilgestzbuch vom 10. Dezember 1907. [Internet]. Available from: https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/19070042/201604010000/210.pdf
  10. Vögeli D. Hohe Einweisungsraten im Kanton Zürich | NZZ. Neue Zürcher Zeitung [Internet]. 2013 Jan 28 [cited 2018 May 26]; Available from: https://www.nzz.ch/zuerich/ein-viertel-aller-psychiatrischen-hospitalisierungen-unfreiwillig-1.17965215
  11. Steinauer R, Huber CG, Petitjean S, Wiesbeck GA, Dürsteler KM, Lang UE, et al. Effect of Door-Locking Policy on Inpatient Treatment of Substance Use and Dual Disorders. Eur Addict Res. 2017;23(2):87–96. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1159/000458757
  12. Le Service d’addictologie est ‘No restraint’ [Internet]. ADDICTOHUG. [cited 2018 May 26]. Available from: https://addictohug.ch/addictologie/no-restraint/
  13. Bennett G, Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational interviewing: Preparing people to change addictive behavior. New York: Guilford Press, 1991. pp. xvii
  14. Korkeila JA, Tuohimäki C, Kaltiala-Heino R, Lehtinen V, Joukamaa M. Predicting use of coercive measures in Finland. Nord J Psychiatry. 2002;56(5):339–45. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1080/080394802760322105
  15. Caplan A. Denying autonomy in order to create it: the paradox of forcing treatment upon addicts. Addiction. 2008;103(12):1919–21. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02369.x
  16. O’Brien C, Cornish JW. Naltrexone for probationers and parolees. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2006;31(2):107–11. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2006.06.002
  17. Farabee D, Prendergast M, Anglin MD. The effectiveness of coerced treatment for drug-abusing offenders. Fed Probat. 1998;62:3.
  18. Schaub M, Stevens A, Berto D, Hunt N, Kerschl V, McSweeney T, et al. Comparing outcomes of ‘voluntary’ and ‘quasi-compulsory’ treatment of substance dependence in Europe. Eur Addict Res. 2010;16(1):53–60. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1159/000265938
  19. Stevens A, Berto D, Heckmann W, Kerschl V, Oeuvray K, van Ooyen M, et al. Quasi-compulsory treatment of drug dependent offenders: an international literature review. Subst Use Misuse. 2005;40(3):269–83. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-200049159
  20. Parhar KK, Wormith JS, Derkzen DM, Beauregard AM. Offender Coercion in Treatment: A Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness. Crim Justice Behav. 2008;35(9):1109–35. [doi:.].https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854808320169
  21. Werb D, Kamarulzaman A, Meacham MC, Rafful C, Fischer B, Strathdee SA, et al. The effectiveness of compulsory drug treatment: A systematic review. Int J Drug Policy. 2016;28:1–9. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.12.005
  22. Theodoridou A, Schlatter F, Ajdacic V, Rössler W, Jäger M. Therapeutic relationship in the context of perceived coercion in a psychiatric population. Psychiatry Res. 2012;200(2-3):939–44. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2012.04.012
  23. Greenfield L, Burgdorf K, Chen X, Porowski A, Roberts T, Herrell J. Effectiveness of long-term residential substance abuse treatment for women: findings from three national studies. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2004;30(3):537–50. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1081/ADA-200032290
  24. Simpson DD, Joe GW, Rowan-Szal GA. Drug abuse treatment retention and process effects on follow-up outcomes. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1997;47(3):227–35. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-8716(97)00099-9
  25. Moos RH, Moos BS. Stay in residential facilities and mental health care as predictors of readmission for patients with substance use disorders. Psychiatr Serv. 1995;46(1):66–72. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.46.1.66
  26. Ball SA, Carroll KM, Canning-Ball M, Rounsaville BJ. Reasons for dropout from drug abuse treatment: symptoms, personality, and motivation. Addict Behav. 2006;31(2):320–30. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2005.05.013
  27. Deane FP, Wootton DJ, Hsu C-I, Kelly PJ. Predicting dropout in the first 3 months of 12-step residential drug and alcohol treatment in an Australian sample. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2012;73(2):216–25. doi:.https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.2012.73.216
  28. Delayahu Y, Nehama Y, Sagi A, Baruch Y, M Blass D. Evaluating the clinical impact of involuntary admission to a specialized dual diagnosis ward. Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci. 2014;51(4):290–5.
  29. Stulz N, Nevely A, Hilpert M, Bielinski D, Spisla C, Maeck L, et al. Referral to Inpatient Treatment Does not Necessarily Imply a Need for Inpatient Treatment. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015;42(4):474–83. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-014-0561-5
  30. Andreas S, Harfst T, Rabung S, Mestel R, Schauenburg H, Hausberg M, et al. The validity of the German version of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS-D): a clinician-rating for the differential assessment of the severity of mental disorders. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2010;19(1):50–62. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.305
  31. Parabiaghi A, Barbato A, D’Avanzo B, Erlicher A, Lora A. Assessing reliable and clinically significant change on Health of the Nation Outcome Scales: method for displaying longitudinal data. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2005;39(8):719–24. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2005.01656.x
  32. Andreas S, Harries-Hedder K, Schwenk W, Hausberg M, Koch U, Schulz H. Is the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales appropriate for the assessment of symptom severity in patients with substance-related disorders? J Subst Abuse Treat. 2010;39(1):32–40. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2010.03.011
  33. Opsal A, Kristensen Ø, Larsen TK, Syversen G, Rudshaug EB, Gerdner A, et al. Factors associated with involuntary admissions among patients with substance use disorders and comorbidity: a cross-sectional study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13(1):57. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-57
  34. Heath LM, Laporte L, Paris J, Hamdullahpur K, Gill KJ. Substance Misuse Is Associated With Increased Psychiatric Severity Among Treatment-Seeking Individuals With Borderline Personality Disorder. J Pers Disord. 2017;•••:1–15. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi_2017_31_307
  35. Colasanti A, Natoli A, Moliterno D, Rossattini M, De Gaspari IF, Mauri MC. Psychiatric diagnosis and aggression before acute hospitalisation. Eur Psychiatry. 2008;23(6):441–8. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2007.09.005
  36. World Health Organization. The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Diagnostic Criteria for Research. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1993.
  37. Hotzy F, Kieber-Ospelt I, Schneeberger AR, Jaeger M, Olbrich S. Length of Involuntary Hospitalization Related to the Referring Physician’s Psychiatric Emergency Experience. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2018;45(2):254–64. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-017-0819-9
  38. Dawson DA, Grant BF, Stinson FS, Chou PS, Huang B, Ruan WJ. Recovery from DSM-IV alcohol dependence: United States, 2001-2002. Addiction. 2005;100(3):281–92. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00964.x
  39. Sobell LC, Cunningham JA, Sobell MB. Recovery from alcohol problems with and without treatment: prevalence in two population surveys. Am J Public Health. 1996;86(7):966–72. doi:.https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.86.7.966
  40. Wang Y, Henriksen CA, Ten Have M, de Graaf R, Stein MB, Enns MW, et al. Common Mental Disorder Diagnosis and Need for Treatment are Not the Same: Findings from the NEMESIS Study. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2017;44(4):572–81. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-016-0745-2

Most read articles by the same author(s)