Long term outcomes and causal modelling of compulsory inpatient and outpatient mental health care using Norwegian registry data: Protocol for a controversies in psychiatry research project

Abstract

ObjectivesCompulsory mental health care includes compulsory hospitalisation and outpatient commitment with medication treatment without consent. Uncertain evidence of the effects of compulsory care contributes to large geographical variations and a controversy on its use. Some argue that compulsion can rarely be justified and should be reduced to an absolute minimum, while others claim compulsion can more frequently be justified. The limited evidence base has contributed to variations in care that raise issues about the quality/appropriateness of care as well as ethical concerns. To address the question whether compulsory mental health care results in superior, worse or equivalent outcomes for patients, this project will utilise registry‐based longitudinal data to examine the effect of compulsory inpatient and outpatient care on multiple outcomes, including suicide and overall mortality; emergency care/injuries; crime and victimisation; and participation in the labour force and welfare dependency.MethodsBy using the natural variation in health providers' preference for compulsory care as a source of quasi‐randomisation we will estimate causal effects of compulsory care on short‐ and long‐term trajectories.ConclusionsThis project will provide valuable insights for service providers and policy makers in facilitating high quality clinical care pathways for a high risk population group.

Psychiatrie ohne Zwang

“…Wissen über die negative Auswirkung für Patienten und Mitarbeitende münden in heterogenen Bemühungen, um die negativen Folgen von Zwangsmaßnahmen zu minimieren [4,5]. Ein Wirksamkeitsnachweis steht allerdings aus und wirft mit Blick auf die Vielschichtigkeit der Prob-lematik (Varianzaufklärung der Zwangsanwendung) die Frage nach geeigneten alternativen Interventionen auf [6][7][8].…”