[Acceptance of Psychiatric and Somatic Advance Directives: A Comparison in Psychiatric Patients and Professionals]. / Akzeptanz von psychiatrischen und somatischen Patientenverfügungen: ein Vergleich unter psychiatrischen Patienten und Fachpersonen.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the attitudes towards somatic and psychiatric advance directives in the German speaking part of Switzerland. METHODS: Questionnaire for psychiatric patients, psychiatrists, psychologists, psychiatric nurses and peers assessing the attitudes towards three exemplary advance directives. RESULTS: The attitudes were mainly positive in all participating groups. Compared to professionals (79-100 %), the somatic advance directive found approval in significantly less patients (46 %). There were no significant group differences regarding the psychiatric advance directives, but patients (58 % and 84 %) were slightly more agreeing compared to professionals (31-50 % and 62-70 %). CONCLUSION: Psychiatric advance directives seem to be broadly accepted. The development of campaigns might help to raise the awareness about these instruments and increase their usage in clinical practice.

Psychiatric advance directives in Switzerland: Knowledge and attitudes in patients compared to professionals and usage in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Psychiatric advance directives (PAD) were shown to be effective in the reduction of coercion and strengthening of the patients` autonomy. Therefore, the Swiss legislation was revised and stipulates that PAD must be taken into account during involuntary hospitalization. This study aimed to analyze knowledge on and attitudes towards this instrument in patients and healthcare practitioners and their usage in clinical practice. METHODS: We developed a structured questionnaire and included patients (n = 110), psychiatrists (n = 205), psychologists (n = 85), nurses (n = 268) and peers (n = 16) to rate their knowledge on and attitudes towards PAD. We registered the existing PAD in patients and peers. The response rate varied between 17% (nurses), 19% (psychologists) 21% (psychiatrists), 33% (peers) and 56% (patients). RESULTS: Only 7% of the participating patients had a PAD. Compared to the other groups, patients had the least knowledge on PAD. Psychiatrists were significantly more critical towards PAD. Concerns that PAD impede necessary and adequate treatment, restrict professionals and result in conflicts between patients and HCP were most frequently named as reason for critical attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: Although being explicitly mentioned in the Swiss legislation the usage of PAD is small. Proactive information and training of psychiatrists might be helpful for a reduction of skeptical attitudes. This might improve the attitudes and lead to active support of patients during the preparation of PAD.