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
- PMID: 34778858
- PMCID: PMC8577163
- DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100233
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
Abstract
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.
© 2021 The Authors.
Conflict of interest statement
All authors have no conflicting interests to disclose.
Similar articles
-
[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].Nervenarzt. 2022 Jul;93(7):706-712. doi: 10.1007/s00115-022-01267-5. Epub 2022 Mar 18. Nervenarzt. 2022. PMID: 35303128 German.
-
Freedom Restrictive Coercive Measures in Forensic Psychiatry.Front Psychiatry. 2020 Mar 5;11:146. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00146. eCollection 2020. Front Psychiatry. 2020. PMID: 32194460 Free PMC article.
-
[The Case Register for Coercive Measures According to the Law on Assistance for Persons with Mental Diseases of Baden-Wuerttemberg: Conception and First Evaluation].Psychiatr Prax. 2019 Mar;46(2):82-89. doi: 10.1055/a-0665-6728. Epub 2018 Aug 27. Psychiatr Prax. 2019. PMID: 30149398 German.
-
The use of coercive interventions in mental health care in Germany and the Netherlands. A comparison of the developments in two neighboring countries.Front Public Health. 2014 Sep 24;2:141. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2014.00141. eCollection 2014. Front Public Health. 2014. PMID: 25309893 Free PMC article. Review.
-
[Monitoring of coercive measures and compulsory treatment in Germany].Nervenarzt. 2022 Nov;93(11):1105-1111. doi: 10.1007/s00115-022-01349-4. Epub 2022 Jul 12. Nervenarzt. 2022. PMID: 35819484 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Increase in coercive measures in psychiatric hospitals in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic.PLoS One. 2022 Aug 31;17(8):e0264046. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264046. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 36044407 Free PMC article.
-
Variations in definitions used for describing restrictive care practices (seclusion and restraint) in adult mental health inpatient units: a systematic review and content analysis.Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2025 Jan;60(1):1-24. doi: 10.1007/s00127-024-02739-6. Epub 2024 Jul 30. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2025. PMID: 39080007 Free PMC article.
-
Mechanical restraint in inpatient psychiatric settings: A systematic review of international prevalence, associations, outcomes, and reduction strategies.Eur Psychiatry. 2025 Apr 25;68(1):e57. doi: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2025.2453. Eur Psychiatry. 2025. PMID: 40275614 Free PMC article.
-
Effects of stricter legislation on coercive measures in child and adolescent psychiatric care: a qualitative interview study with staff.BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Feb 5;24(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-05553-1. BMC Psychiatry. 2024. PMID: 38317134 Free PMC article.
-
Estimating costs of bedside assessment by a judge in each case of mechanical restraint in Germany after new legislation.Front Psychiatry. 2024 Jan 8;14:1291130. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1291130. eCollection 2023. Front Psychiatry. 2024. PMID: 38260786 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Steinert T, Birk M, Flammer E. Subjective distress after seclusion or mechanical restraint: One- year follow-up of a randomized controlled study. Psychiatr Serv. 2013;64 - PubMed
-
- Belanger S. The “S&R challenge”: Reducing the use of seclusion and restraint in a state psychiatric hospital. J Healthc Qual. 2001;23:19–24. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources