<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tore Hofstad</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tonje Lossius Husum</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jorun Rugkåsa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bjørn Morten Hofmann</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Geographical variation in compulsory hospitalisation – ethical challenges</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BMC Health Services Research (Open Access)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Autonomi</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">autonomy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Beneficence</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ethical analysis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Etisk analyse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Involuntary hospitalisation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Justice</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Non-maleficence</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rettferdighet</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Right care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Riktig omsorg</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Service delivery variation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">small area analysis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Småområdestatistikk</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvang</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ufrivillig sykehusinnleggelse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Variasjon i tjenesteleveranse</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2022</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12/2022</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12913-022-08798-2</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">22</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Background&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;Compulsory hospitalisation in mental health care restricts patients&amp;rsquo; liberty and is experienced as harmful by many. Such hospitalisations continue to be used due to their assumed benefit, despite limited scientific evidence. Observed geographical variation in compulsory hospitalisation raises concern that rates are higher and lower than necessary in some areas.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Methods/discussion&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;We present a specific normative ethical analysis of how geographical variation in compulsory hospitalisation challenges four core principles of health care ethics. We then consider the theoretical possibility of a &amp;ldquo;right&amp;rdquo;, or appropriate, level of compulsory hospitalisation, as a general norm for assessing the moral divergence, i.e., too little, or too much. Finally, we discuss implications of our analysis and how they can inform the future direction of mental health services.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Irene Wormdahl</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Trond Hatling</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tonje Lossius Husum</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sloveig Kjus</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jorun Rugkåsa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dorte Brodersen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Signe Dahl Christensen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Petter Sundt Nyborg</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Torstein Borch Skolseng</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Eva Irene Ødegård</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anna Margrethe Andersen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Espen Gundersen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rise, Marit B.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The ReCoN intervention: a co-created comprehensive intervention for primary mental health care aiming to prevent involuntary admissions</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BMC Health Services Research (Open Access)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Involuntary admission</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Primary mental health care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">primærhelsetjenesten</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reducing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">reduction</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">reduksjon</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvang</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsinnleggelse</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2022</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">07/2022</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12913-022-08302-w</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">22</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Background&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;Reducing involuntary psychiatric admissions is a global concern. In Norway, the rate of involuntary admissions was 199 per 100,000 people 16&amp;thinsp;years and older in 2020. Individuals&amp;rsquo; paths towards involuntary psychiatric admissions usually unfold when they live in the community and referrals to such admissions are often initiated by primary health care professionals. Interventions at the primary health care level can therefore have the potential to prevent such admissions. Interventions developed specifically for this care level are, however, lacking. To enhance the quality and development of services in a way that meets stakeholders&amp;rsquo; needs and facilitates implementation to practice, involving both persons with lived experience and service providers in developing such interventions is requested.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Aim&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;To develop a comprehensive intervention for primary mental health care aiming to prevent involuntary admissions of adults.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Methods&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;This study had an action research approach with a participatory research design. Dialogue conferences with multiple stakeholders in five Norwegian municipalities, inductive thematic analysis of data material from the conferences, and a series of feedback meetings were conducted.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Results&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;The co-creation process resulted in the development of the ReCoN (Reducing Coercion in Norway) intervention. This is a comprehensive intervention that includes six strategy areas: [1] Management, [2] Involving Persons with Lived Experience and Family Carers, [3] Competence Development, [4] Collaboration across Primary and Specialist Care Levels, [5] Collaboration within the Primary Care Level, and [6] Tailoring Individual Services. Each strategy area has two to four action areas with specified measures that constitute the practical actions or tasks that are believed to collectively impact the need for involuntary admissions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Conclusions&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;The ReCoN intervention has the potential for application to both national and international mental health services. The co-creation process with the full range of stakeholders ensures face validity, acceptability, and relevance. The effectiveness of the ReCoN intervention is currently being tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial. Given positive effects, the ReCoN intervention may impact individuals with a severe mental illness at risk of involuntary admissions, as more people may experience empowerment and autonomy instead of coercion in their recovery process.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsinnleggelse</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tonje Lossius Husum</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Marit Helene Hem</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reidar Pedersen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">En studie av synet på etiske utfordringer relatert til arbeid med bruk av tvang hos ansatte i psykiske helsetjenester</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Etikk</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">helsepersonell</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">psykiske helsetjenester</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvang</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Senter for medisinsk etikk ved universitetet i Oslo har gjennomført en nettbasert spørreundersøkelse av helsepersonells erfaringer med etiske utfordringer, tvang og krenkelser innen psykiske helsetjenester. Denne artikkelen presenterer en analyse av svarene som ble gitt på et åpent spørsmål om hva helsepersonell erfarte som etisk utfordrende i arbeidet relatert til bruk av tvang. Totalt 439 ansatte med ulik yrkesbakgrunn beskrev en eller flere etiske utfordringer. Svarene ble analysert med manifest innholdsanalyse og rangert etter hvor ofte de ble nevnt. Følgende etiske utfordringene ble nevnt oftest: 1. Tvil og usikkerhet angående bruk av formell tvang, 2. Andre former for restriksjoner, 3. Tvangsmedisinering, 4. Uenighet mellom berørte parter, 5. Utfordringer relatert til utføring av tvangstiltak, 6. Organisatoriske faktorer og mangelfulle ressurser, 7. Overdreven bruk av makt, maktmisbruk og uegnet personell. Studien bidrar med ny kunnskap om hva helsepersonell innen psykiske helsetjenester opplever som etisk utfordrende i sammenheng med bruk av tvang.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Etikk</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Olaf Gjerløw Aasland</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tonje Lossius Husum</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reidun Førde</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reidar Pedersen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Store forskjeller i holdninger til tvang blant fagfolk i psykiatrien</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tidsskrift for Den Norske Laegeforening</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Holdninger</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psykiater</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psykolog</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvang</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">04/2018</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://tidsskriftet.no/2018/05/debatt/store-forskjeller-i-holdninger-til-tvang-blant-fagfolk-i-psykiatrien</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">138</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Som et ledd i myndighetenes forsøk på å redusere bruk av tvang i psykisk helsevern fikk Senter for medisinsk etikk ved Universitetet i Oslo i 2011&amp;nbsp;midler til et bredt anlagt prosjekt. Formålet var å bidra til mer kunnskap om etiske utfordringer ved bruk av tvang og hvordan slike best kan håndteres. Et sentralt delprosjekt for å redusere tvangsbruk var å prøve ut og evaluere etiske refleksjonsgrupper på avdelingsnivå (&lt;a href=&quot;https://tidsskriftet.no/2018/05/debatt/store-forskjeller-i-holdninger-til-tvang-blant-fagfolk-i-psykiatrien#ref1&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I samarbeid med Legeforskningsinstituttet (LEFO) var et annet delprosjekt å gjennomføre en nasjonal spørreundersøkelse blant de fem vanligste yrkesgruppene i psykisk helsevern og rusvern; psykiatere, psykologer, sykepleiere, andre fagutdannede og hjelpeyrker, bl.a. for å kartlegge yrkesmessige forskjeller. Et av målene var å undersøke holdninger til tvang. Den første artikkelen fra dette delprosjektet er nylig publisert (&lt;a href=&quot;https://tidsskriftet.no/2018/05/debatt/store-forskjeller-i-holdninger-til-tvang-blant-fagfolk-i-psykiatrien#ref2&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;), og vi ønsker her å dele resultatene med en bredere offentlighet.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Via aktuelle fagorganisasjoner ble det sendt elektroniske spørreskjemaer til alle medlemmer som arbeidet med psykisk helse eller rus, til sammen 15 576 i hele landet. Med denne indirekte utsendelsen var det ikke mulig å purre, og svarprosenten var 7,5 (1 160/15 576). I spørreskjemaet var det seks kliniske situasjoner hvor bruk av tvang kunne være aktuelt (&lt;a href=&quot;https://tidsskriftet.no/2018/05/debatt/store-forskjeller-i-holdninger-til-tvang-blant-fagfolk-i-psykiatrien#box1&quot;&gt;ramme 1&lt;/a&gt;). I hver vignett var det foreslått 3&amp;ndash;5 handlingsalternativer, der minst ett innebar bruk av tvang. På to av vignettene (D og E) var noen av alternativene ulovlige, men dette var ikke nevnt i spørreskjemaet.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">9</style></issue><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Etikk</style></label></record></records></xml>