Contextualizing the experiences of Black pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic: 'It's been a lonely ride'.

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed the prenatal care experience, specifically regarding medical appointments and social opportunities. It is critical to capture this change through the narratives of pregnant people, particularly those of marginalized populations, whose voices may often be underrepresented in the literature. This mixed-methods paper summarizes the experiences of 40 pregnant Black/African American (AA) women during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional, online survey was administered between 2020 and 2021 to assess prenatal health and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' pregnancy experience. Coping behaviors during the pandemic were self-reported using the COPE-IS. Univariate analyses were conducted. An additional analysis of participants (n = 4) was explored through a week-long qualitative exercise using a photo documentation procedure. Photo-Elicitation Interviews (PEI) were conducted to capture and center their pandemic pregnancy experiences. Sources of stress during the pandemic varied, with the most common being financial concerns (n = 19, 47.5%). Over half of the sample (n = 18, 54.5%) self-reported increases in their positive coping behaviors during the pandemic, such as communicating with friends and family, talking to healthcare providers, listening to music, and engaging in spiritual practices-such as prayer. The four PEI study participants reflected on the impacts of social distancing on their prenatal experience and mentioned hospital and provider-related weariness due to their race. The findings of this study suggest that during the COVID-19 pandemic, Black/AA pregnant women in Charlotte, NC used social support, mindfulness practices, self-advocacy, and health literacy to navigate challenges present during their prenatal health experience. This paper highlights the personal, social, and structural experiences of pregnant women during a public health crisis so that responsive and effective programs or policies can be planned in the future.

[The German S3 guidelines on prevention of coercion and treatment of aggressive behavior: from evidence to consensus, from consensus to implementation]. / S3-Leitlinie zur Verhinderung von Zwang und Behandlung aggressiven Verhaltens: von der Evidenz zum Konsens, vom Konsens zur Implementierung.

The German S3 guidelines on prevention of coercion: prevention and therapy of aggressive behavior in adults (2018) are cross-sectional guidelines that in addition to medical scientific evidence also touch to a great extent on questions of ethics and law as well as organizational structures of the healthcare system. Accordingly, in addition to the research on evidence, the consensus process also had a strong weighting in the development of the recommendations. The appropriate participation of experts from various fields and their representation in the consensus group was therefore of central importance. Particularly important is the implementation into clinical practice by means of the recommendations for implementation of the German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (DGPPN) for psychiatric wards, psychiatric clinics, and care regions. For psychiatric wards, the recommendations are being evaluated with a multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT), the PreVCo study.

Sleep disturbances in individuals with down syndrome: An overview.

Down Syndrome, or Trisomy 21, is one of the most common birth defects, with 6,000 babies born annually with Down Syndrome in the U.S. One of many health risk factors individuals with Down Syndrome experience is sleep issues, ranging from poor sleep quality to high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea. This literature review aims to review these sleep challenges in this population and explore consequences and treatment options.

[Effects of the Decision of the German Constitutional Court on mechanical restraint in 2018 : Coercive measures in the psychiatric hospitals in Baden-Wuerttemberg in 2019 compared to the years 2015-2017]. / Auswirkungen der Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts 2018 zu Fixierungen : Zwangsmaßnahmen in den psychiatrischen Kliniken in Baden-Württemberg 2019 im Vergleich zu 2015­2017.

On 23 July 2018 the German Constitutional Court decided that mechanical restraint in psychiatric patients with 5 or 7­point mechanical restraint lasting longer than 30 min requires a judicial authorization. On the same day, the German Association for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy (DGPPN) published guidelines on the prevention of coercion and violence. Together, this can be considered as the strongest intervention to reduce coercion on a national level worldwide. The registry for coercive measures in the Federal State of Baden-Wuerttemberg, available since 2015 and comprising all 32 hospitals licensed to admit involuntary patients, has made it possible to evaluate the effect of the legal change. We analyzed the mean percentage of patients subjected to coercive measures and the mean cumulative duration of these interventions in ICD-10 diagnostic groups in psychiatric hospitals from 2015 to 2017 compared to 2019 among a total of 438,003 admissions. The percentage of patients subjected to any kind of freedom-restricting coercion (restraint or seclusion) decreased from 6.7% (average 2015-2017) to 5.8% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Effects were strongest in patients with organic (F0) and schizophrenic disorders (F2). The percentage of patients subjected to mechanical restraint decreased from 4.8% to 3.6% in 2019, and the percentage of mechanical restraints less than 30 min increased from 1.8% to 10.5%. Vice versa, the percentage of patients subjected to seclusion increased from 2.9% to 3.3%. The median cumulated duration of restraint and seclusion per affected case decreased from 12.7h to 10.9 h (median). The intervention was probably responsible for a reduction of the percentage of cases subjected to coercive measures by about 13% and a reduction of the duration of these measures per affected case by about 14%.

[Monitoring of coercive measures and compulsory treatment in Germany]. / Monitoring von Zwangsmaßnahmen und Zwangsbehandlungen in Deutschland.

Epidemiological registers on the burden of disease and adverse events (deaths, serious side effects, etc.) play an important role in the management, evaluation, and improvement of healthcare treatment for the population. This also applies to coercive measures in the psychiatric healthcare system. Such registers only became feasible on a broad basis due to the availability of electronic medical records and steadily increasing computing capacities; however, in most German states, registers have not been implemented. Data protection problems must be taken into account in the collation of person-related data but can be solved by appropriate pseudonymization procedures taking the prerequisites of data parsimony into account. Extensive data are now available from the Baden-Wuerttemberg register for coercive measures, which has been in existence since 2015 and which enabled, for instance, evaluating the consequences of the changes to the law following the 2018 ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court on mechanical restraint and the consequences of the coronavirus pandemic. In the meantime, there are also state-wide data collections in some other German states; however, unlike in Baden-Wuerttemberg, these registers do not include measures under guardianship law. A nationwide register for coercive measures, compulsory treatment and involuntary detention has justifiably repeatedly been demanded for a long time. A major obstacle is the historically developed separation between the responsibility of the German states for the detention regulated by public law and the Federal State for the scope of application of the guardianship law.

[DGPPN pilot study on the implementation of the S3 guideline "Prevention of coercion: prevention and therapy of aggressive behavior in adults"]. / DGPPN-Pilotstudie zur Implementierung der S3-Leitlinie "Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen".

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether implementation recommendations derived from the German guidelines "Prevention of coercion" can be implemented on acute psychiatric wards by means of implementation consultants into ward work and if this contributes to an increased level of adherence to guideline intervention recommendations approved by the DGPPN (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde)? MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two medical or nursing experts advised ward teams on the implementation of three individually selected recommendations from the guidelines in a structured consulting process over 6 months. The degree of implementation of the recommendations was assessed before and after the intervention by the ward teams together with the implementation consultants using a tool developed for this purpose (PreVCo rating tool). RESULTS: A total of five wards responsible for compulsorily admitted patients took part in the pilot study; three of them completed the intervention. On all three wards, implementation of the guideline recommendations improved for both selected and unselected recommendations. The strategy of using implementation consultants as well as the application of the PreVCo rating tool were well accepted and considered feasible by both the treatment teams and the implementation consultants. CONCLUSION: This pilot study showed that an implementation of recommendations on psychiatric wards derived from the German guidelines "Prevention of coercion" supported by implementation consultants is feasible, well acceptable among treatment teams and can lead to positive changes. The sample of five wards with diverse patient profiles was convincing. The efficacy in terms of reduction of coercive measures is currently being investigated in a randomized controlled trial on 55 psychiatric wards in different parts of Germany, with an intervention based on this pilot study.

Neuro-oncological patients' and caregivers' psychosocial burden during the COVID-19 pandemic-A prospective study with qualitative content analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic may reinforce psychosocial distress of neuro-oncological patients. We aimed to (1) differentiate the burden caused by the pandemic versus the tumor and (2) establish topics relevant for brain tumor patients (BTPs) and caregivers. METHODS: Patients and caregivers were prospectively assessed from April 2020-July 2020 by a 10-item comprising interview over the phone, including qualitative and quantitative questions. They were quantitatively evaluated i.a. by the distress thermometer (DT, score 1-10). The qualitative questions were analyzed using structured content analysis: The interview questions defined the main categories. Subcategories were derived by an inductive approach assessing the frequency of patients' and caregivers' answers. RESULTS: A total of 69 patients and 20 caregivers were interviewed; n = 36 were female (49%), mean age was 53 years (range 32-81). Patients' disease-related DT scores were higher than the COVID-19-related DT scores: the median of the disease-related DT score was 7 (range 2-10) versus median of COVID-19-related distress: 5.0 (range 2-7). Caregivers perceived a higher burden due to the disease (DT median disease: 8; range 2-10 vs. DT pandemic: 3, range 0-10). A total of five main and 21 subcategories were elaborated, most frequently mentioned were "restrictions in public and private affairs" (28%), "changes in the psychological well-being" (23%), "limited social interaction by contact restriction" (25%). Subcategories relevant for caregivers were similar to those of BTPs. CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of patients and caregivers still perceived the brain tumor disease as more burdensome than the pandemic. We established main and subcategories of interview items possibly of great relevance to patients during these difficult times, which could be implemented in the content-related adaption of the psychosocial assessment.

Patients' perception of coercion with respect to antipsychotic treatment of psychotic disorders and its predictors.

PURPOSE: The present study investigates perceived coercion in psychiatric inpatients under prescribed antipsychotic medication without a court order. The objective of this study was to investigate whether and to what extent involuntary and voluntary inpatients feel coerced to take their medication and which factors affect perceived coercion. METHODS: Voluntarily and involuntarily admitted patients (55 and 36, respectively) were interviewed about the extent of perceived coercion. In addition, socio-demographic and clinical data were collected. The Admission Experience Scale (aAES) was used to assess perceived coercion concerning medication. To measure insight into illness, attitude towards medication, and symptom severity, we used a questionnaire on insight into illness (FKE-10), the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI-10), and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS-24), respectively. RESULTS: Voluntarily treated patients experienced significantly less coercion when taking prescribed medication in inpatient settings than involuntarily treated patients. The experience of coercion was not related to socio-demographic or clinical variables nor to the BPRS-24 score, but to insight into illness and attitude towards medication. Patients who had experienced at least one coercive measure during the index hospital stay showed a higher level of perceived coercion. CONCLUSION: Perceived coercion related to medication is dependent on insight into illness and experience of previous coercive interventions rather than on the severity of psychopathological symptoms. These findings are very similar to a previous study in a forensic psychiatric sample. Having experience of at least one coercive measure seems to be a decisive aspect of the extent of the patients' perceived coercion.

[German S3 guidelines on avoidance of coercion: prevention and therapy of aggressive behavior in adults]. / S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen.

This article reports on the developmental process, significance and scope of clinical practice guidelines and presents changes to the former S2 guidelines on therapeutic interventions for aggressive behavior (2010). Aggressive behavior is understood both in the context of risk characteristics on the patient side and as a result of escalating conflicts between patients and staff. If coercive measures are unavoidable, they must be carried out in the most bearable and humane way possible for all participants. For the first time these guidelines provide clear evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations for these issues. In addition to prevention, de-escalation, rapid tranquilization and pharmacotherapy of acute states of agitation and of recurrent aggressive behavior, technical, legal and ethical aspects of coercive measures and therapeutic support during coercive measures are covered. Further recommendations concern measures of tertiary prophylaxis, such as debriefing, joint crisis plans and external monitoring by visiting commissions and political committees. Implementation recommendations have been formulated from the guidelines. They are currently being tested in a pilot study funded by the German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (DGPPN).

[Open doors in psychiatric hospitals : An overview of empirical findings]. / Offene Türen in psychiatrischen Kliniken : Eine Übersicht über empirische Befunde.

BACKGROUND: Currently, it is a topic of debate whether psychiatric hospitals can and should be managed with a full open door policy. The revised legislation of public law for involuntary commitment explicitly allows or even encourages such practice in several German federal states. In parts of Austria, open doors are required for legal reasons. A systematic literature search was conducted for articles providing empirical data related to this issue. METHOD: Literature search in PubMed augmented by a manual search in references of retrieved papers and reviews with similar objectives. RESULTS: A total of 26 articles reporting empirical data could be identified. Most of these articles came from Germany or Switzerland. The majority were published within the past 5 years. The definition of "open doors" ranged from an only vaguely defined open door policy up to explicit set time periods with open doors. Some studies reported a decrease in coercive interventions. No study reported any associated adverse events resulting from open doors in psychiatric wards. DISCUSSION: Generally, all studies had methodological weaknesses. Prospective randomized controlled studies or quasi-experimental studies are missing in the context of European healthcare systems. The risk of bias was considerable in most studies. A final conclusion regarding the possible extent of psychiatry with open doors and the associated risks is currently not possible. There is an urgent need for future high-quality prospective studies.

Factors and Processes Facilitating Recovery from Coercion in Mental Health Services-A Meta-Ethnography.

BACKGROUND: Being subjected to or witnessing coercive measures in mental health services can have a negative impact on service users, carers and professionals, as they most often are experienced as dehumanising and traumatic. Coercion should be avoided, but when it does happen, it is important to understand how the experience can be processed so that its consequences are managed. METHOD: A systematic review and meta-ethnography was used to synthesise findings from qualitative studies that examined service users', staff's and relatives' experiences of recovery from being exposed to coercive measures in mental health care settings. We identified, extracted and synthesised, across 23 studies, the processes and factors that were interpreted as significant to process the experience. RESULTS: Recovery from coercion is dependent on a complex set of conditions that support a sense of dignity and respect, a feeling of safety and empowerment. Being in a facilitating environment, receiving appropriate information and having consistent reciprocal communication with staff are the means through which these conditions can be achieved. People employ strategies to achieve recovery, both during and after coercion, to minimise its impact and process the experience. CONCLUSIONS: The findings point to the importance of mental health care settings offering recovery-oriented environments and mental health professionals employing recovery-oriented practices, that would empower service users to develop strategies for managing their mental distress as well as their experiences in mental health care in a way that minimises traumatisation and fosters recovery.

Functionally-instructed modifiers of response to ATR inhibition in experimental glioma.

BACKGROUND: The DNA damage response (DDR) is a physiological network preventing malignant transformation, e.g. by halting cell cycle progression upon DNA damage detection and promoting DNA repair. Glioblastoma are incurable primary tumors of the nervous system and DDR dysregulation contributes to acquired treatment resistance. Therefore, DDR targeting is a promising therapeutic anti-glioma strategy. Here, we investigated Ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 related (ATR) inhibition (ATRi) and functionally-instructed combination therapies involving ATRi in experimental glioma. METHODS: We used acute cytotoxicity to identify treatment efficacy as well as RNAseq and DigiWest protein profiling to characterize ATRi-induced modulations within the molecular network in glioma cells. Genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 functional genomic screens and subsequent validation with functionally-instructed compounds and selected shRNA-based silencing were employed to discover and investigate molecular targets modifying response to ATRi in glioma cell lines in vitro, in primary cultures ex vivo and in zebrafish and murine models in vivo. RESULTS: ATRi monotherapy displays anti-glioma efficacy in vitro and ex vivo and modulates the molecular network. We discovered molecular targets by genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 loss-of-function and activation screens that enhance therapeutic ATRi effects. We validated selected druggable targets by a customized drug library and functional assays in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, our study leads to the identification of novel combination therapies involving ATRi that could inform future preclinical studies and early phase clinical trials.

Estimating costs of bedside assessment by a judge in each case of mechanical restraint in Germany after new legislation.

Background: In 2018, the German Federal Constitutional Court decided that mechanical restraint is the most intrusive coercive measure and its use requires a judge's decision after bedside assessment if lasting longer than 30 min. Subsequently, legal changes were realized. The objective of our study was to determine the number of saved coercive episodes and saved hours in seclusion or restraint in 2019 compared to the average of the previous years, 2015-2017, as well as costs per saved episode, hour, and case saved from any coercive measure. Methods: We used data from the Baden-Wuerttemberg case registry for coercive measures, covering all 32 psychiatric hospitals of the Federal State and 435,767 admissions in the study period. Time expenditure was calculated as 3.5 h with an average of 51.95 € per working hour on the side of the justice system and 1.5 h (45.94 €/h) on the side of the hospital per case. Results: The number of coercive episodes decreased by 10.0% from 28,181 (average 2015-2017) to 25,371 (2019). The number of hours in seclusion or restraint decreased by 17.9% from 321,956 (2015-2017) to 264,423 (2019). This resulted in the cost of 872.33 € per saved episode and 42.61 € per saved hour in seclusion or restraint. Conclusion: Given the correctness of our estimations, saving 1 h in coercion by less than 1 h of an expert's work might be justified from an ethical and economic perspective.

Implementation of guidelines on prevention of coercion and violence: baseline data of the randomized controlled PreVCo study.

Introduction: The PreVCo study examines whether a structured, operationalized implementation of guidelines to prevent coercion actually leads to fewer coercive measures on psychiatric wards. It is known from the literature that rates of coercive measures differ greatly between hospitals within a country. Studies on that topic also showed large Hawthorne effects. Therefore, it is important to collect valid baseline data for the comparison of similar wards and controlling for observer effects. Methods: Fifty five psychiatric wards in Germany treating voluntary and involuntary patients were randomly allocated to an intervention or a waiting list condition in matched pairs. As part of the randomized controlled trial, they completed a baseline survey. We collected data on admissions, occupied beds, involuntarily admitted cases, main diagnoses, the number and duration of coercive measures, assaults and staffing levels. We applied the PreVCo Rating Tool for each ward. The PreVCo Rating Tool is a fidelity rating, measuring the degree of implementation of 12 guideline-linked recommendations on Likert scales with a range of 0-135 points covering the main elements of the guidelines. Aggregated data on the ward level is provided, with no patient data provided. We performed a Wilcoxon signed-rank-test to compare intervention group and waiting list control group at baseline and to assess the success of randomization. Results: The participating wards had an average of 19.9% involuntarily admitted cases and a median 19 coercive measures per month (1 coercive measure per occupied bed, 0.5 per admission). The intervention group and waiting list group were not significantly different in these measurements. There were 6.0 assaults per month on average (0.3 assaults per occupied bed and 0.1 per admission). The PreVCo Rating Tool for guideline fidelity varied between 28 and 106 points. The percentage of involuntarily admitted cases showed a correlation with coercive measures per month and bed (Spearman's Rho = 0.56, p < 0.01). Discussion: Our findings that coercion varies widely within a country and mainly is associated with involuntarily admitted and aggressive patients are in line with the international literature. We believe that we included a sample that covers the scope of mental health care practice in Germany well.Clinical trial registration: www.isrctn.com, identifier ISRCTN71467851.

Implementation of guidelines on prevention of coercion and violence (PreVCo) in psychiatry: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Background: Interventions to prevent the use of coercion in psychiatric hospitals have been summarized in the 2018 German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Psychosomatic's comprehensive guidelines. Twelve recommendations for implementation of these guideline on psychiatric wards have been deducted and their feasibility has been tested in a pilot study, using external implementation consultants as facilitators. The objective of the PreVCo study was to test their effect in a randomised clinical trial. Methods: Fifty-four psychiatric wards in Germany treating voluntary and involuntary patients were randomly allocated to either an intervention or to a waiting list condition. The intervention consisted of the implementation of three out of 12 suggested recommendations as selected by the ward teams, supported by external study workers. As the primary outcome measure, the number of coercive measures used per bed and month in the final 3 months of the intervention period was determined. Secondary outcomes were the cumulative duration of coercive measures used per bed and months and assaults per bed and month. Achieved guideline adherence was measured by a fidelity scale developed for this purpose during a pilot study for the PreVCo Rating Tool. After a 3-month baseline collection period under routine conditions, randomisation was done after matching wards pairwise according to frequency of coercive measures used and scores on the PreVCo Rating Tool at baseline. The duration of the intervention period was 12 months; control wards received only an initial workshop presentation of the study and completed their PreVCo ratings. We used the Wilcoxon signed rank test and the paired t-test and conducted sensitivity analyses for different periods of observation. Findings: Neither the number of coercive measures used per month and bed nor their cumulative duration nor the number of assaults per bed and months differed significantly between the 27 intervention wards and the 27 control wards in the final 3 months of the intervention period. The median number of coercive measures used decreased by 45% (median 0.96 (IQR 1.34)-0.53 (IQR 0.59) from baseline until the end of the intervention period on the intervention wards and by 28% (median 0.98 (IQR 1.71)-0.71 (IQR 1.08) on waiting list wards. The PreVCo Rating Tool showed a significant improvement in intervention wards compared to control wards, indicating a successful implementation. Interpretation: The study demonstrated that guideline adherence could be significantly improved by the intervention. However, there was no evidence for an effect on the frequency or duration of coercive measures used. Spill-over effects and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-patient care might have limited the effect of the intervention. Further research from robust randomised controlled trials are necessary to identify effective interventions to reduce the use of coercion in psychiatric hospitals. Funding: The study was funded by the German Innovationsfonds beim Gemeinsamen Bundesausschuss (project no. 01VSF19037). The funder had no role in study design or data collection.

"Our Patients Are Different": Predictors of Seclusion and Restraint in 31 Psychiatric Hospitals.

Background: Research in recent years has demonstrated that the use of coercive measures such as seclusion and restraint differs very much between hospitals within a country. In 2015, a central register for all coercive measures in the German federal state of Baden-Wuerttemberg has been established for 32 hospitals treating involuntary patients. The objective of the present study was to identify factors that determine the differences between these hospitals. Methods: Data on coercive measures and diagnoses from the central register in 2015-2017 were linked with structural data of the 32 hospitals and their supply areas. Results: On average, coercive measures were applied in 6.7% of cases (SD = 2.8%; Min-Max = 0.35-12.0%). The proportion of affected cases was significantly correlated with the proportion of involuntary patients (r = 0.56), the proportion of cases with affective or neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders (r = -0.42), number of hospital beds (r = 0.44), a sheltered home associated with the hospital (r = 0.43) and number of addiction counseling centers per 100,000 inhabitants in the service area (r = -0.39). The final regression model only included the proportion of involuntary cases as a significant predictor (standardized beta = 0.55, adjusted R 2 = 0.27). Conclusions: The predominating part of the considerable variance observed between hospitals could not be explained by structural variables. The proportion of involuntary patients had a significant impact, but a considerable amount of unexplained variance due to different practices within psychiatric hospitals remains.

Fatigue, Depression, Cardiovascular Risk, and Self-Rated Health: Comparing a Community Sample of Adults to Those With a History of Myocardial Infarction.

This cross-sectional descriptive study was designed to compare fatigue, depression, cardiovascular risk, and self-rated health in community dwelling adults (CDA) without a history of myocardial infarction (MI) compared to adults who had experienced an MI 3 to 7 years ago. A convenience sample (n = 40) of CDA completed: demographic health form, Revised Piper Fatigue Scale, and CES-D. Age-matched controls (n = 40) were randomly selected from the Recurrence of Myocardial Infarction (ROMI) study. Most (N = 80) were White (66%) with a mean age of 58.3 (SD = 11.5; range 21-83). The ROMI group reported more diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, and hypertension, and had higher fatigue (t(61) = 4.51, p < .001). No differences were noted in depression scores (p = .952). Higher fatigue and depression scores were correlated with poorer self-rated health: r = .544 (p < .001) and r = .295 (p = .008).

Increase in coercive measures in psychiatric hospitals in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the pandemic in 2020 caused changes in psychiatric hospital cases, the percentage of patients exposed to coercive interventions, and aggressive incidents. METHODS: We used the case registry for coercive measures of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg, comprising case-related data on mechanical restraint, seclusion, physical restraint, and forced medication in each of the State's 31 licensed hospitals treating adults, to compare data from 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: The number of cases in adult psychiatry decreased by 7.6% from 105,782 to 97,761. The percentage of involuntary cases increased from 12.3 to 14.1%, and the absolute number of coercive measures increased by 4.7% from 26,269 to 27,514. The percentage of cases exposed to any kind of coercive measure increased by 24.6% from 6.5 to 8.1%, and the median cumulative duration per affected case increased by 13.1% from 12.2 to 13.8 hrs, where seclusion increased more than mechanical restraint. The percentage of patients with aggressive incidents, collected in 10 hospitals, remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: While voluntary cases decreased considerably during the pandemic, involuntary cases increased slightly. However, the increased percentage of patients exposed to coercion is not only due to a decreased percentage of voluntary patients, as the duration of coercive measures per case also increased. The changes that indicate deterioration in treatment quality were probably caused by the multitude of measures to manage the pandemic. The focus of attention and internal rules as well have shifted from prevention of coercion to prevention of infection.

Effect of the introduction of immediate judge's decisions in 2018 on the use of coercive measures in psychiatric hospitals in Germany: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: On 23 July 2018, the German Constitutional Court decided that mechanical restraint in psychiatric patients lasting longer than 30 minutes requires a judge's immediate decision. On the same day, the German Association for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy published its guideline on the prevention of coercion and violence. The registry for coercive measures in the federal state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, available since 2015 and comprising all 32 hospitals licensed to admit involuntary patients, has made it possible to evaluate the effect of the legal change, considered the strongest intervention ever in Germany to reduce coercion. METHODS: We analysed the mean percentage of patients subjected to coercive measures and the mean cumulative duration of these interventions in ICD-10 diagnostic groups in psychiatric hospitals from 2017 compared to 2019 among a total of 233,0273 admissions. FINDINGS: The percentage of patients subjected to any kind of freedom-restricting coercion decreased from 6·6% in 2017 to 5·8% in 2019 (p = 0·000). Accordingly, the percentage of patients subjected to mechanical restraint decreased from 4·8% to 3·6% in 2019 (p = 0·000). At the same time, the percentage of patients subjected to seclusion increased from 2·9% to 3·3% (p = 0·000). The median cumulated duration of restraint and seclusion per affected case decreased from 12·5 to 11·9 hrs (p = 0·001). INTERPRETATION: There is clear evidence that a strong legal intervention was effective in reducing the use of coercive measures under routine conditions. FUNDING: The registry is funded by the Ministry of Social Welfare and Integration.

Reduction of coercive measures under routine conditions in psychiatric hospitals 2004-2019: Strong effects in old age psychiatry, much less in general psychiatry.

BACKGROUND: Many interventions to reduce the use of seclusion and restraint have been suggested in the last decades. Evidence-based interventions in old age psychiatry are different from those in general psychiatry. A common database for psychiatric hospitals introduced in 2004 allowed to examine the use of seclusion and restraint over 16 years under routine conditions. METHODS: A registry for coercive measures in the Federal State of Baden-Wuerttemberg has been available since 2015, and comprises all 32 hospitals licensed to admit involuntary patients. A study group had collected data prospectively since 2004 from a subsample of these hospitals. We analyzed the mean percentage of patients subjected to coercive measures and the mean cumulative duration of these interventions in ICD-10 diagnostic groups in psychiatric hospitals from 2004 to 2019 among a total of 1,038,239 admissions. RESULTS: The proportion of cases affected by coercive measures dropped significantly from 28.4 to 10.5% in patients with ICD-10 F0 disorders, while rates in patients with other diagnoses decreased insignificantly from 7.0 to 5.4%. The cumulated duration of coercive measures per affected case also dropped significantly among patients with F0 disorders, while changes in patients with other diagnoses remained insiginficant. CONCLUSIONS: The use of coercive measures in patients with organic disorders could be reduced by about 50% in a State of 11 million inhabitants within 15 years, while in contrast no substantial reduction occurred among all other diagnostic groups. Specific interventions to reduce coercive interventions seem to be particularly successful for this patient group.