[Advance directives and mental disorders: a practice recommendation of the Commission for Ethics and Law of the German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics]. / Patientenverfügungen und psychische Erkrankung ­ eine Praxisempfehlung der Kommission Ethik und Recht der DGPPN.

BACKGROUND: Since the creation of legal requirements for advance directives by the legislator in 2009, special aspects of their application in the treatment of people with mental illnesses have been discussed. GOAL OF THE PAPER: Important questions on dealing with advance directives in everyday life will be answered in a practice-oriented manner. RESULTS: Among other things, this document answers the question of the conditions under which a patient can refuse or consent to hospitalization and treatment in advance, and in particular how to deal with advance directives whose implementation would also affect the rights of third parties. The German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (DGPPN) has addressed these and other questions in the present document and added practical advice on how to formulate advance directives for people with mental illnesses and how to deal with psychiatric advance directives. DISCUSSION: The DGPPN has developed an advance directive for the area of mental health and published it on its website together with detailed explanations. With the help of this advance directive, people can decide on their treatment in phases of incapacity to consent in the context of a mental crisis or illness.

[Coercive Medication: Who, how, how Long? A Retrospective Chart Analysis in 6 Hospital Sites in Baden-Wuerttemberg]. / Ärztliche Zwangsbehandlung: Wer, wie, wie lange? Eine retrospektive Fallanalyse an sechs Klinikstandorten in Baden-Württemberg.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of the practice of coercive treatment in Germany after the Constiutional Court's decision in 2011. METHODS: The documented emergency treatments (N=86) and judicially approved compulsory treatments (N=62) in 2015 and 2016 at 6 hospital locations in Baden-Württemberg were retrospectively analysed. RESULTS: Patients had an average of 8 previous psychiatric hospitalisations with a cumulative duration of 645 days on average and 87% had a psychotic disorder. 34% received subsequent compulsory treatment within one year. The median duration of compulsory treatment was 15 days. 92% of the patients were taking an antipsychotic at discharge, 45% received further treatment in a day hospital or a psychiatric outpatient clinic. CONCLUSION: Coercive treatment affects a relatively small, chronically severely ill group of patients and is frequently recurrent among them. For considerable part, no consecutive treatment setting can be established after discharge.

Forensic aspects of dissociative positive symptoms in trauma-related disorders and borderline personality disorder.

A psychotically motivated act or an act committed under impaired insight and control of action in the midst of an acute psychosis is the standard for lack of criminal responsibility. There is now increasing evidence that positive symptoms, particularly in the form of hallucinations and delusions, in trauma-related disorders and borderline personality disorder (BPD) are comparable to positive symptoms in psychotic disorders, posing a challenge for differential diagnosis and forensic assessment of the relevance of positive symptoms to insight and self-control. Due to the indistinguishability of the phenomena, there is both a risk of misdiagnosis of a psychotic disorder and also trivialization with the use of pseudo-hallucinations or quasi-psychotic labels. Essential phenomenological differences that may be helpful in forensic assessments are the usually preserved reality testing in trauma-related disorders and BPD, as well as differences in psychopathological symptom constellations. Because of these differences relevant to forensic assessments, it seems useful to distinguish trauma-related disorders and BPD with positive symptoms from psychotic disorders.

Abolition of coercion in mental health services - A European survey of feasibility.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the Council of Europe agreed to urge member states to take steps toward total abolition of psychiatric coercive measures. AIMS: To test if this aspiration is perceived as realistic and what the alternative would be in the event of a total abolition, we surveyed members of the European FOSTREN network of mental health practitioners and researchers, which is specifically dedicated to exchanging knowledge on reducing psychiatric coercion to its minimum. METHODS: Web-based survey. Categorical responses were analyzed using frequencies, and free text responses were analyzed through thematic analysis. RESULTS: In total, out of 167 invitations to FOSTREN network members, 76 responded to the survey (Response Rate 45.5%). A minority (31%) of participating experts dedicated to the reduction of psychiatric coercive measures believed a total abolition to be an achievable goal. A commonly held belief was that total abolition is not achievable because mental health disorders are difficult to treat and may cause violence, necessitating coercion, and there is a need to protect the involved persons from harm. Those responding that complete abolition is achievable argued that the consequences of coercion outweigh any gains and indicated that use of advance directives are sufficient as alternatives to coercion. CONCLUSION: Of a European group of experts specifically dedicated to the reduction of psychiatric coercion who participated in this questionnaire study, a minority believed a total abolition be an achievable goal. The study adds to the empirical evidence of the feasibility of the aspiration to totally abolish involuntary measures in the mental health services from the perspective of experts.

[Implementation of an Open Door Policy on Two Acute Care Units]. / Implementierung eines Konzepts der offenen Türen auf zwei psychiatrischen Akutstationen an zwei Kliniken.

BACKGROUND: Since the amendments to the Baden-Württemberg Psychiatric Assistance Act, psychiatric patients who are treated involuntarily can be admitted to open wards. As a result, a comprehensive research project was carried out to implement an open-door policy. This work evaluates the attitudes of patients and therapeutic teams. METHODS: Over the course of a year, 8 focus groups with 6 to 11 participants were conducted with patients and staff before and at the end of the intervention phase and analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: The concept of open doors was received positively. The staff raised safety concerns whereas on the patient side the door status seemed to be of limited relevance regarding the experience of autonomy or stigmatization. DISCUSSION: The elaboration of conflict issues allows a further development of specific concepts towards the implementation of open doors on psychiatric acute wards.

Searching for diagnoses and subgroups: a suggestion for criteria.

New subgroups of psychiatric disorders are often claimed. In contrast, classification systems have repeatedly had to abandon established subgroups such as paranoid vs. disorganised and catatonic schizophrenia due to lack of empirical evidence. Four criteria are proposed that should be met to claim valid subgroups: 1. distinct distribution of the defining characteristic between groups; 2. significant differences in variables other than those defining the subgroups cross-sectionally and longitudinally; 3. long-term stability; 4. significant differences between groups in aetiology, pathophysiology, and evidence-based therapy. In contrast to examples from somatic medicine, such as type 1 and type 2 diabetes, few psychiatric disorders meet these requirements.

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.

Adaptación lingüística y conceptual al español de la Escala de experiencia de coerción / Linguistic and conceptual adaptation of the "Coercion Experience Scale" to Spanish

Introducción: las medidas coercitivas son un área de discusión entre profesionales de la salud mental. Su uso se entiende como inevitable en el manejo del paciente agudo con la finalidad de evitar daños a sí mismo o a otros. Sin embargo, deben usarse con precaución y únicamente como último recurso. La literatura sobre sus efectos perjudiciales es limitada, aún más respecto a las percepciones de los pacientes, siendo la Coercion Experience Scale (CES) pionera en la evaluación de la experiencia subjetiva de las medidas coercitivas. Método: proceso de adaptación lingüística y conceptual-traducción al español de la CES, mediante traducción-retrotraducción con escalas de equivalencia semántica y conceptual. Resultados: la versión final en español presenta una equivalencia tipo A (perfecta) o tipo B (satisfactoria) para todos sus ítems. Discusión/conclusiones: la versión adaptada presenta una buena paridad con la original, permitiendo la medición adecuada en muestras de habla española

Introduction: issues surrounding coercive measures are an area of concern among mental health clinicians. Their use tends to be seen as unavoidable in the acute patient management in order to prevent harm to the patient or others. They should be used with caution, and only as a last resort. The lack of scientific literature about the effects of coercive interventions is limited, especially regarding patient perceptions. The "Coercion Experience Scale" (CES) is pioneer in the evaluation of the subjective experience of coercive measures. Method: linguistic and conceptual adaptation process into Spanish of the CES, using translation-back-translation methodology, with semantic and conceptual equivalence rating. Results: all items of the final version received a type A (perfect) or B (satisfactory) equivalence assessment. Discussion/conclusions: the adapted version has good parity with the original version, guaranteeing proper measurement in samples of Spanish-speaking populations