Attitudinal variance among patients, next of kin and health care professionals towards the use of containment measures in three psychiatric hospitals in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: In psychiatric treatment containment measures are used to de-escalate high-risk situations. These measures can be characterized by their immanent amount of coercion. Previous research could show that the attitudes towards different containment measures vary throughout countries. The aim of this study was to compare the attitudes towards containment measures between three study sites in Switzerland which differ in their clinic traditions and policies and their actual usage of these measures. METHODS: We used the Attitude to Containment Measures Questionnaire (ACMQ) in three psychiatric hospitals in Switzerland (Zurich, Muensingen and Monthey) in patients, their next of kin (NOK) and health care professionals (HCP). Furthermore, we assessed the cultural specifics and rates of coercive measures for these three hospitals. RESULTS: We found substantial differences in the usage of and the attitudes towards some containment measures between the three study sites. The study site accounted for a variance of nearly zero in as needed medication to 15% in seclusion. The differences between study sites were bigger in the HCPs' attitudes (up to 50% of the variance), compared to NOK and patients. In the latter the study site accounted for up to 6% of the variance. The usage/personal experience of containment measures in general was associated with higher agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Although being situated in the same country, there are substantial differences in the rates of containment measures between the three study sites. We showed that the HCP's attitudes are more associated with the clinic traditions and policies compared to patients' and their NOKs' attitudes. One can conclude that patients' preferences depend less on clinic traditions and policies. Therefore, it is important to adapt treatment to the individual patients' attitudes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was reviewed and approved by the Cantonal Ethics Commission of Zurich, Switzerland (Ref.-No. EK: 2016-01526, decision on 28.09.2016) and the Cantonal Ethics Commission of Bern, Switzerland (Ref.-Nr. KEK-BE: 2015-00074). This study has been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. The permission for conduction of the study was granted by the medical directors at the three study sites. The authors informed the respondents (patients, NOK, HCP) of their rights in the study in an oral presentation and/or a cover letter. They assured the participants of the confidentiality and anonymity of the data, and the voluntariness of participation. Patients were given an information sheet with the possibility to consent in the conduction of the study. Return of the completed questionnaires from HCP and NOK was constituted as confirmation of their consent. No identifying factors were collected to ensure privacy. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Comparing Attitudes to Containment Measures of Patients, Health Care Professionals and Next of Kin.

Background: In clinical psychiatric practice, health care professionals (HCP) must decide in exceptional circumstances after the weighing of interests, which, if any, containment measures including coercion are to be used. Here, the risk for patients, staff, and third parties, in addition to therapeutic considerations, factor into the decision. Patients' preference and the inclusion of relatives in these decisions are important; therefore, an understanding of how patients and next of kin (NOK) experience different coercive measures is crucial for clinical decision making. The aim of this study is to compare how patients, HCP, and NOK assess commonly used coercive measures. Methods: A sample of 435 patients, 372 HCP, and 230 NOK completed the Attitudes to Containment Measures Questionnaire (ACMQ). This standardized self-rating questionnaire assessed the degree of acceptance or rejection of 11 coercive measures. Results: In general, HCPs rated the coercive measures as more acceptable than did NOK and patients. The largest discrepancy in the ratings was found in regard to the application of coercive intramuscular injection of medication (effect size: 1.0 HCP vs. patients). However, the ratings by NOK were significantly closer to the patients' ratings compared to patients and HCP. The only exception was the acceptance of treatment in a closed acute psychiatric ward, which was deemed significantly more acceptable by NOK than by patients. Also, patients who had experienced coercive measures themselves more strongly refused other measures. Conclusion: Patients most firmly rejected intramuscular injections, and the authors agree that these should only be used with reservation considering a high threshold. This knowledge about the discrepancy of the ratings should therefore be incorporated into professional training of HCP.

Focal arrhythmia confined within the coronary sinus and maintaining atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: The coronary sinus (CS) is a complex structure comprising a mesh of circumferential muscular fibers with oblique connections to both atria. We describe further evidence for the clinical importance of CS arrhythmogenicity in maintaining atrial fibrillation (AF) in humans. METHODS: Since January 2004, following a sequential approach, the CS and the inferior left atrium were ablated in 144 patients with symptomatic drug refractory AF. Patients were included for analysis when this step resulted in the electrical dissociation of the CS from both atria with restoration of sinus rhythm, but with continued arrhythmic activity in the CS. The electrophysiologic mechanism of the confined arrhythmia was considered as focal activity (automaticity or triggered activity) by the presence of electrograms spanning less than 75% of the cycle length in the CS. RESULTS: After restoration of sinus rhythm, four male patients (3% of the patients, three persistent and one permanent AF) were identified in whom arrhythmia continued within the CS. Repetitive activity confined to the disconnected CS was inconsistent in occurrence, as well as in duration (1 sec to 15 min) and cycle length (from 158 to 380 ms). For all four patients, electrogram mapping of the entire CS was compatible with a focal mechanism. In two patients, bursts alternating with slow dissociated activity suggested automaticity. In one patient, local activity consistently coupled to the previous sinus beat favored triggered activity. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that the CS may be a potential source of focal rapid activity maintaining AF.