<?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%">Nina Camilla Wergeland</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Åshild Fause</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Astrid Karine Weber</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anett Beatrix Osnes Fause</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Capacity-based legislation in Norway has so far scarcely infuenced the daily life and responsibilities of patients’ carers: a qualitative study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BMC Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Capacity-based legislation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carer</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community Treatment Order</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Family-carer</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Patient autonomy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Norwegian mental health act</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">02/2023</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://hdl.handle.net/10037/30648</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Background - When capacity-based mental health legislation was introduced in Norway in 2017, there was concern about the consequences of change in the law for patients&amp;rsquo;carer whose community treatment order was revoked as a result of being assessed as having capacity to consent. The concern was that the lack of a community treatment order would increase carers&amp;rsquo; responsibilities in an already challenging life situation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The aim of this study is to explore carers&amp;rsquo; experiences of how their responsibility and daily life were affected after the patient&amp;rsquo;s community treatment order was revoked based on capacity to consent.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Method - We conducted individual in-depth interviews from September 2019 to March 2020 with seven carers of patients whose community treatment order was revoked following assessment of capacity to consent, based on the change in the legislation. The transcripts were analysed with inspiration from reflexive thematic analysis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Results - The participants had little knowledge about the amended legislation, and three out of seven did not know about the change at the time of the interview. Their responsibility and daily life were as before, but they felt that the patient was more content, without relating this to the change in the law. They had found that coercion was necessary in certain situations, which made them worry whether the new legislation would make it more difficult to use coercion.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Conclusion - The participating carers had little or no knowledge of the change in the law. They were involved in the patient&amp;rsquo;s everyday life as before. The concerns prior to the change about a worse situation for carers had not affected them. On the contrary, they found that their family member was more satisfied with life and the care and treatment provided. This may suggest that the intention of the legislation to reduce coercion and increase autonomy was fulfilled for these patients, without resulting in any significant change in carers&amp;rsquo; lives and responsibilities.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal article</style></work-type></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%">Hirsch, Sophie</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Baumgardt, Johanna</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bechdolf, Andreas</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Buhling-Schindowski, Felix</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cole, Celline</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Flammer, Erich</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mahler, Lieselotte</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Muche, Rainer</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sauter, Dorothea</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Vandamme, Angelika</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Steinert, Tilman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Implementation of guidelines on prevention of coercion and violence: baseline data of the randomized controlled PreVCo study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Frontiers in Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">evidence based care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">guidelines</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">implementation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">mental heath</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psychiatry</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Restraint</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Seclusion</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">14</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;The PreVCo study examines whether a structured, operationalized implementation of guidelines to prevent coercion actually leads to fewer coercive measures on psychiatric wards. It is known from the literature that rates of coercive measures differ greatly between hospitals within a country. Studies on that topic also showed large Hawthorne effects. Therefore, it is important to collect valid baseline data for the comparison of similar wards and controlling for observer effects.&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%">Hirsch, Sophie</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Baumgardt, Johanna</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bechdolf, Andreas</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Buhling-Schindowski, Felix</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cole, Celline</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Flammer, Erich</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mahler, Lieselotte</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Muche, Rainer</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sauter, Dorothea</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Vandamme, Angelika</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Steinert, Tilman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Implementation of guidelines on prevention of coercion and violence: baseline data of the randomized controlled PreVCo study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Frontiers in Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">evidence based care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">guidelines</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">implementation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">mental heath</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psychiatry</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Restraint</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Seclusion</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">14</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;The PreVCo study examines whether a structured, operationalized implementation of guidelines to prevent coercion actually leads to fewer coercive measures on psychiatric wards. It is known from the literature that rates of coercive measures differ greatly between hospitals within a country. Studies on that topic also showed large Hawthorne effects. Therefore, it is important to collect valid baseline data for the comparison of similar wards and controlling for observer effects.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>36</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tella Lantta</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Joy Duxbury</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Alina Haines Delmot</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anna Bjørkdahl</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Models, frameworks and theories in the implementation of programs targeted to reduce formal coercion in mental health settings: a systematic review</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">coercive measures</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">implementation science</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">implementation tool</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">intervention</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mental Health</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">psychiatric care</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">96/2023</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1158145/full</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;troduction: Implementation models, frameworks and theories (hereafter tools) provide researchers and clinicians with an approach to understand the processes and mechanisms for the successful implementation of healthcare innovations. Previous research in mental health settings has revealed, that the implementation of coercion reduction programs presents a number of challenges. However, there is a lack of systematized knowledge of whether the advantages of implementation science have been utilized in this field of research. This systematic review aims to gain a better understanding of which tools have been used by studies when implementing programs aiming to reduce formal coercion in mental health settings, and what implementation outcomes they have reported. Methods: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science. A manual search was used to supplement database searches. Quality appraisal of included studies was undertaken using MMAT&amp;mdash;Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A descriptive and narrative synthesis was formed based on extracted data. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed in this review. Results: We identified 5,295 references after duplicates were removed. Four additional references were found with a manual search. In total eight studies reported in nine papers were included in the review. Coercion reduction programs that were implemented included those that were holistic, and/or used professional judgement, staff training and sensory modulation interventions. Eight different implementation tools were identified from the included studies. None of them reported all eight implementation outcomes sought from the papers. The most frequently reported outcomes were acceptability (4/8 studies) and adaptation (3/8). With regards to implementation costs, no data were provided by any of the studies. The quality of the studies was assessed to be overall quite low. Discussion: Systematic implementation tools are seldom used when efforts are being made to embed interventions to reduce coercive measures in routine mental health care. More high-quality studies are needed in the research area that also involves perspectives of service users and carers. In addition, based on our review, it is unclear what the costs and resources are needed to implement complex interventions with the guidance of an implementation tool. Systematic review registration: [Prospero], identifier [CRD42021284959].&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Systematic Review</style></work-type></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%">Olav Nyttingnes</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jūratė Šaltytė Benth</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tore Hofstad</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jorun Rugkåsa</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The relationship between area levels of involuntary psychiatric care and patient outcomes: a longitudinal national register study from Norway</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BMC Psychiatry (Open Access)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Alvorlige psykiske lidelser</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Compulsion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Involuntary care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mental health legislation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psykisk helse-lovgivning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Register study</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Registerstudie</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Severe mental disorders</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvang</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangstiltak</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ufrivillig omsorg</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">02/2023</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12888-023-04584-4</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">23</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;Mental health legislation permits involuntary care of patients with severe mental disorders who meet set legal criteria. The Norwegian Mental Health Act assumes this will improve health and reduce risk of deterioration and death. Professionals have warned against potentially adverse effects of recent initiatives to heighten involuntary care thresholds, but no studies have investigated whether high thresholds have adverse effects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Aim&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;To test the hypothesis that areas with lower levels of involuntary care show higher levels of morbidity and mortality in their severe mental disorder populations over time compared to areas with higher levels. Data availability precluded analyses of the effect on health and safety of others.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Methods&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;Using national data, we calculated standardized (by age, sex, and urbanicity) involuntary care ratios across Community Mental Health Center areas in Norway. For patients diagnosed with severe mental disorders (ICD10 F20-31), we tested whether lower area ratios in 2015 was associated with 1) case fatality over four years, 2) an increase in inpatient days, and 3) time to first episode of involuntary care over the following two years. We also assessed 4) whether area ratios in 2015 predicted an increase in the number of patients diagnosed with F20-31 in the subsequent two years and whether 5) standardized involuntary care area ratios in 2014&amp;ndash;2017 predicted an increase in the standardized suicide ratios in 2014&amp;ndash;2018. Analyses were prespecified (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04655287).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Results&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;We found no adverse effects on patients&amp;rsquo; health in areas with lower standardized involuntary care ratios. The standardization variables age, sex, and urbanicity explained 70.5% of the variance in raw rates of involuntary care.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3 data-test=&quot;abstract-sub-heading&quot;&gt;Conclusions&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lower standardized involuntary care ratios are not associated with adverse effects for patients with severe mental disorders in Norway. This finding merits further research of the way involuntary care works.&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%">Husum, T. L.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Siqveland, J.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ruud, T., &amp; Lickiewicz</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Systematic literature review of the use of Staff Attitudes to Coercion Scale (SACS)</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Frontiers in Psychiatry</style></secondary-title><short-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Systematic literature review of the use of Staff Attitudes to Coercion Scale (SACS)</style></short-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">assessment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">attitudes</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mental Health</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">staff</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">14</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;Staff&amp;#39;s attitudes to the use of coercion may influence the number of coercive interventions employed and staff willingness to engage in professional development projects aimed at reducing the use of coercion itself. The Staff Attitude to Coercion Scale (SACS) was developed to assess the attitudes of mental healthcare staff to the use of coercion in 2008 and has been employed subsequently. This global study systematically reviews and summarizes the use of the scale in research.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;Seven databases were searched for studies using SACS in articles published in peer reviewed journals and gray literature. In addition, researchers who have asked for permission to use the scale since its development in 2008 were contacted and asked for their possible results. Extracting of data from the papers were performed in pairs of the authors.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;Of the 82 identified publications, 26 papers with 5,838 respondents were selected for review. A review of the research questions used in the studies showed that the SACS questionnaire was mostly used in studies of interventions aimed at reducing coercion and further explain variation in the use of coercion.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;SACS is, to our best of knowledge, the only questionnaire measuring staff&amp;#39;s attitudes to the use of coercive interventions in mental health services. Its widespread use indicates that the questionnaire is perceived as feasible and useful as well as demonstrating the need for such a tool. However, further research is needed as the relationship between staff attitudes to coercion and the actual use of coercion remains unclear and needs to be further investigated. Staff attitudes to coercion may be a prerequisite for leaders and staff in mental healthcare to engage in service development and quality improvement projects.&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%">Steinert, Tilman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Using coercion in mental disorders or risking the patient’s death? An analysis of the protocols of a clinical ethics committee and a derived decision algorithm</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Medical Ethics</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Death</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Disabled Persons</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ethics- Medical</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">human rights</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2023/11/23/jme-2023-109578</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;While principle-based ethics is well known and widely accepted in psychiatry, much less is known about how decisions are made in clinical practice, which case scenarios exist, and which challenges exist for decision-making. Protocols of the central ethics committee responsible for four psychiatric hospitals over 7&amp;thinsp;years (N=17) were analysed. While four cases concerned suicide risk in the case of intended hospital discharge, the vast majority (N=13) concerned questions of whether the responsible physician should or should not initiate the use of coercion in patients lacking mental capacity. The committee&amp;rsquo;s recommendations were non-uniform. Forced feeding and electroconvulsive therapy were endorsed in each one case. In two cases of intermittent loss of capacity due to heavy drinking or intermittent severe suicidal ideation, a self-binding contract was recommended and the use of coercion was considered as justified for a very limited period. In all other cases, most of which involved involuntary treatment, the use of coercion was not endorsed. Without exception, the recommendations were accepted with relief by the physicians and their treatment teams, who feared liability in the event of harm to the patient. Eventually, a model of a decision algorithm was derived from the ethical arguments in the protocols.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>36</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Åshild Gjellestad</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Care practices at the intersection between resistance and involuntary treatment and care.A mixed-methods study of how health care professionals approach resistance to care and involuntary treatment among home-dwelling persons with dementia</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">dementia</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">forced treatment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">involuntary treatment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">resistance</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2022</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">file:///C:/Users/jha041/Downloads/Gjellestad-PhD-VID-2022.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">978-82-8456-008-3</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Bakgrunn: Antall hjemmeboende personer med demens vil øke de kommende årene. De fleste personer med demens blir etterhvert avhengig av assistanse og støtte for å kunne bo hjemme. Økt behov for hjelp er assosiert med motstand hos personer med demens. Det å møte motstand mot helsehjelp og bruk av tvungen helsehjelp er vanlig i omsorg for hjemmeboende personer med demens. Politiske føringer, lover og retningslinjer for demensomsorg, strukturer for helse og omsorgstjenestene, og tilgjengelige økonomiske og menneskelige ressurser påvirker omsorg for hjemmeboende personer med demens. Økte forventninger om brukermedvirkning og retten til privatlivets fred tilfører ytterligere kompleksitet til utfordrende situasjoner der helsepersonell som sykepleiere og helsefagarbeidere møter motstand mot helsehjelp.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Studiens hensikt: Den overordnete hensikten med denne studien var å utvikle ny kunnskap og innsikt i omsorgspraksiser relatert til motstand mot helsehjelp og hvordan motstand blir vurdert og behandlet i krysningen mellom etisk, juridisk og klinisk skjønn. &amp;bull; Innsikt i formelle tvangsvedtak fattet for hjemmeboende personer med demens&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Artikkel 1)&amp;bull; Utforske bruk av tillitsskapende tiltak i hjemmeboende personer med demens i forkant av tvangsvedtak&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Artikkel 2)&amp;bull; Utforske sykepleiere og helsefagarbeideres profesjonelle skjønn i møte med motstand mot helsehjelp fra hjemmeboende personer med demens&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Artikkel 3)Metode: Dette var en mixed-method studie, inspirert av kritisk realisme.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I Studie 1, som resulterte i de to første artiklene, så brukte vi deskriptive statistiske analyser for å analysere 108 vedtak om tvungen helsehjelp. I 88 av disse vedtakene var tillitsskapende tiltak beskrevet. Disse ble analysert ved kvalitativ tematisk analyse. I Studie 2 (artikkel 3), så deltok 18 sykepleiere og helsefagarbeidere i fokusgruppe og enkeltintervju. Data fra intervjuene ble analysert ved kvalitativ tematisk analyse. Resultatene fra de to studiene ble til slutt kombinert, og ulikheter og likheter ble vurdert.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Resultat: 1) Vi fant at omsorgspraksiser til hjemmeboende personer med demens søker å unngå tvang og vektlegger å beholde tillit i relasjonen. Strukturelle tillitsskapende tiltak er oftest brukt, og relasjonelle tillitsskapende er minst brukt. Verdier som autonomi, selvbestemmelse og integritet ser ut til å være mer belyst enn helserisiko og sårbarhet. Det kan synes som om det er mangel på kommunikasjon og gjensidig forståelse mellom helsepersonell for når vurdering og handling relatert til risiko og sårbarhet hos hjemmeboende personer med demens som motsetter seg hjelp bør iverksettes. Ansvaret for helse og omsorgstjenester til hjemmeboende personer med demens er delt mellom hjemmesykepleien, fastlegene, familie og personen det gjelder, men det kan se ut som at forståelsen av hvem som er ansvarlig når personen gjør motstand er uklart.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;2) Vi fant at politiske føringer, omsorgsideologier og anvendelse av lovverk kan være i utakt med helse og omsorgstjenestenes eksisterende potensiale. Den sterke vektleggingen av selvbestemmelse for personer med demens kan medføre at det oppfattede handlingsrommet for relasjonelle intervensjoner i demensomsorg er innskrenket. Dette kan være med å forklare den relativt lave frekvensen, men høye uttrykte verdien av relasjonelle tillitsskapende tiltak. Selv om tvungen helsehjelp er rettferdiggjort og hjemlet i lov for noen situasjoner, så er det ikke beskrevet som legitimt i klinisk sykepleiepraksis. Begrepet &amp;laquo;tvang eller tvungen helsehjelp&amp;raquo;, er svært negativt ladet og ser ikke ut til å gjenkjennes som et passende begrep for å beskrive de tiltakene som gjøres for å omgå eller overgå motstand hos hjemmeboende personer med demens.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Konklusjon og implikasjoner fremtidig forskning: Vi fant at faktorer som innvirker på helsepersonell sine møter med motstand mot helsehjelp inkluderer kulturell kontekst som for eksempel politiske og kliniske føringer og lovverk for demensomsorg, organisatorisk strukturelt rammeverk som for eksempel strukturer og system for samarbeid, ansvars og myndighetsfordeling, egen rolleforståelse, nivå av relevant klinisk, etisk, og juridisk sykepleie kompetanse, og endelig respekt for personen med demens autonomi og preferanser. Alt dette utgjør en del av den profesjonell dømmekraften som tas i bruk ved motstand mot helsehjelp. Det kan se ut som verdier uttrykt i politiske føringer, lover og retningslinjer og i eksisterende omsorgsstrukturer i hjemmesykepleien kan opptre som selvmotsigende. Dette inkluderer den uttrykte verdien av selvbestemmelse og individuelt ansvar og risikoen for lidelse og udekte grunnleggende behov er en slik selvmotsigelse. Vi argumenter for at denne sårbarheten må i større grad tas høyde for, fordi det kan påvirke tilgjengelighet og kvalitet på tjenester til hjemmeboende personer med demens.Vi fant at tvang, tvungen helsehjelp, helsehjelp med tvang er negativt ladede begrep. Det er en mulighet for at tvang ikke dokumenteres og at uregulert gråsone tvang gjennomføres på grunn av at tiltak for å hjelpe ikke gjenkjennes eller forstås som tvang. Det er avgjørende for kunne ivareta pasienten beste og pasientsikkerhet, at utfordringer som oppleves i møte med motstand til hjelp kan diskuteres åpent. En måte å tilnærme seg dette på er å ha systematiske refleksjoner om hvilke praksiser som kommer til utrykk i møte med motstand. &amp;laquo;Ufrivillig behandling og omsorg&amp;raquo; kan være et bedre begrep å bruke og &amp;laquo;tenke med&amp;raquo; både i forskning og i kommunikasjon rundt fenomenet.Det finnes uavklarte utfordringer med hensyn til familiens rolle i møte med motstand, om hvor deres ansvar tar slutt og når helse og omsorgstjenestenes ansvar skal begynne. I lys av en kommende tillitsreform så kan det argumenteres for at det er behov for at dette bør belyses, spesielt i vurderingen av det økte ansvaret og forventningene som legges på familien i omsorg for personer med demens i fremtidige helsetjenester. Det moralske versus det juridiske ansvar må utforskes og beskrives.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Background: The number of persons with dementia who live at home is projected to increase in the upcoming years. Most persons with dementia will eventually depend on assistance and support to be able to continue living at home. An increased need for assistance among those who develop dementia is associated with resistance to care. Encountering resistance to care and the use of forced treatment and care is common when working with home-dwelling persons with dementia. Care-related policies, laws and regulations for dementia care, structures for health and care services, and available economic and human resources all influence the care of home-dwelling persons with dementia. Increased expectations for user-involvement and the right to privacy in the home add complexity to challenging situations where nurses encounter resistance to care. Purpose of study: The overall aim for the study was to contribute new knowledge and insight regarding care practices related to resistance to care. It examines how these are assessed and managed at the intersection between ethical, legal, and clinical judgement: &amp;bull; To gain insights into formal decisions regarding forced treatment and care designed for home dwelling persons with dementia (Article 1) &amp;bull; To explore the use of trust-building interventions among home-dwelling persons with dementia who resist care, as described by healthcare professionals in documents regarding decisions related to forced treatment and care (Article 2) &amp;bull; To explore nurses&amp;rsquo; professional judgement when encountering resistance to care among home dwelling persons with dementia (Article 3). Methods: The study employed a mixed-methods research design and applied critical realism theory. For study one, which resulted in the two first Articles, documents containing 108 decisions regarding forced treatment and care were analyzed using descriptive statistical analysis. Further trust-building interventions used in 88 of these decisions were analyzed qualitatively via thematic analysis. In study two (Article 3), 18 registered and licensed practice nurses participated in focus group interviews. The data were analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis. The results were finally combined, contrasted, and compared. Results: 1) We found that care practices dedicated to home-dwelling persons with dementia who aim to avoid forced treatment and care have an emphasis on maintaining trust. Structural trust-building interventions are most frequently used, and relational trust-building is least frequently used. Values of autonomy, self-determination, and integrity appeared to be more illuminated than health risks and vulnerability. There seems to be a lack of communication and mutual understanding between health professionals regarding when risk and vulnerability should be assessed or acted upon among home dwelling persons with dementia who resist care. Responsibility for the health and care rights of persons with dementia is shared between home health care services, general practitioners, family 8 members, and the person itself, and accountability seems to be nebulous when these agents encounter resistance to care. 2) There seems to be a misalignment between dementia care policy, legislation, and the structural prerequisites of home health and care services. The strong emphasis on the right to decide among those with dementia may imply that the perceived room for maneuvering relational interventions of the professional caretaker in home and health care practices has become limited. This explains the relatively low frequency but high value of relational interventions. Although forced treatment and care in some situations is justified by law, it is not described as justifiable in clinical nursing practice. The concept of forced treatment and care has a highly negative reputation and does not seem to be recognized as a suitable pretext for the interventions that are used to bypass or manage resistance to care. Conclusion and implications for future research: We found that important factors that influence nursing care practices when encountering resistance to care among home-dwelling persons with dementia include cultural context, this encompasses policies related to dementia care and laws, organizational structural circumstances, namely structures regarding collaboration, divisions of responsibility and authority, understanding of roles, the presence or absence of relevant clinical, ethical and legal competence, and finally respect for the autonomy and expressed preferences of the person with dementia. All of these are embedded in professional judgement. There seem to be contradictory values expressed in policies, regulations and in existing care structures. These include manifestations of the value of self-determination and individual responsibility and the risk of suffering and unmet care needs in nursing care practices. This vulnerability must be accounted for because it can impact the quality and the accessibility of care services for home-dwelling persons with dementia. We found that coercion, restraint, and forced treatment and care are negatively laden concepts. There is a possibility that forced treatment and care is not documented and that unregulated grey-zone care is performed because the interventions are not recognized as coercion. It is crucial to patient well-being and patient safety that challenges associated with resistance to care among home-dwelling persons with dementia are discussed openly. Involuntary treatment and care may be better a concept to employ and &amp;ldquo;to think with&amp;rdquo; when conducting research and when communicating about the phenomenon. There are unattended challenges regarding where family-related moral and legal responsibility ends and where health and care services-related moral and legal responsibilities start. In light of the coming trust reform, we argue that there is a need to illuminate this, especially considering the increased responsibility and expectations that are imposed on family members in future care for persons with 9 dementia. The moral versus the legal responsibility for home-dwelling persons with dementia should be explored and delineated.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>34</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Veronica Fjeld</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A comparison of Norway and Denmark’s legislations regarding the use of restraints in  psychiatric institutions in light of the Human Rights Convention article 3.</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">article 3</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">artikkel 3</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">belteseng</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">coercive measures</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Human Rights Convention</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mekaniske tvangsmidler</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Restraints</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvangsmidler.</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%">05.08.2022</style></date></pub-dates></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">University of Dundee</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dundee</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;The theme of the dissertation is to examine the Norwegian and Danish legislations regarding the use of restraints in psychiatric health care and study the legislations in light of the European Convention on Human Rights article 3. The hypothesis is that Denmark uses restraints in a wider scope and with a longer duration than Norway.&amp;nbsp;Based on this, could distinctions in regulation explain this difference? Furthermore, the use of restraints is a severe intervention in a person&amp;rsquo;s sphere and integrity. ECHR article 3 prohibits such intervention, unless some requirements are fulfilled. Therefore, is the operating law in Norway and Denmark in accordance with article 3? To answer these questions the legislations which regulates when it is lawful to put a patient under restraints will be examined and thereafter the legislations will be compared to see if there is a difference. To examine the situation regarding use of restraints and whether the two countries practice is in accordance with article 3, one court decision from both the countries will be examined and the two most recent reports from The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.&amp;nbsp;This will give an indication of the situation of the operating law in the two countries.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Master thesis</style></work-type></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%">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>34</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Joakim Lossius Husum</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Celina Jakobsen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">En kvantitativ undersøkelse om forskjeller i holdninger til tvang mellom profesjonsgrupper i psykisk helsevern</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Holdninger</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Paternalisme</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Staff Attitude to Coercion Scale</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvang</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsbehandling</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsinnleggelser</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsmidler</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2021</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12/2021</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://munin.uit.no/bitstream/handle/10037/25497/thesis.pdf?sequence=2&amp;isAllowed=y</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">UiT - Norges arktiske universitet (Open Access)</style></publisher><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Master Thesis</style></work-type><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsbehandling</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>34</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oda Martine Leirvik</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">En undersøkelse av hvordan psykiatriske pasienter ønsker å bli ivaretatt gjennom bruk av mekaniske tvangsmidler i psykisk helsevern En litteraturstudie basert på pasienters egne erfaringer, hentet fra nyere forskning</style></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%">care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">mechanical restraint</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mekaniske tvangsmidler</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">mental health care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">omsorg</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pasientopplevelse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">patient experience</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psykisk helsevern</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvang</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2021</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2783458/no.ntnu%3ainspera%3a81471222%3a34436998.pdf?sequence=1&amp;isAllowed=y</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">NTNU, Institutt for psykisk helse</style></publisher><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Vernepleiere kan med loven i hånden bruke mekaniske tvangsmidler overfor pasienter i tvungent psykisk helsevern om det ikke er noen annen utvei. Pasienter som opplever bruken av mekaniske tvangsmidler, er allerede sårbare og kjenner på et stort tap av autonomi når de blir utsatt for disse. Oppgavens hensikt er å undersøke hvordan psykiatriske pasienter ønsker å bli ivaretatt gjennom en opplevelse med mekaniske tvangsmidler. En vernepleier har en sentral rolle i utøvelse av tvang, samt ved ivaretakelse av pasienten gjennom hele prosessen. Metoden er litteraturstudie, og problemstillingen belyses ved hjelp av seks utvalgte forskningsartikler av nyere dato. Resultatene fra denne bacheloroppgaven tyder på at vernepleierens væremåte, tilstedeværelse og kommunikasjon er viktige faktorer for ivaretakelse under mekanisk tvang. Å ivareta pasientens rettigheter kommer også frem som viktig for å føle på omsorg fra vernepleieren i en situasjon med mekaniske tvangsmidler.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;English summary:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social educators can, with the law in hand, use mechanical coercive measures against patients in compulsory mental health care if there is no other way out. Patients who experience the use of mechanical coercive measures are already vulnerable and feel a great loss of autonomy when they are exposed to these. The purpose of the thesis is to investigate how psychiatric patients want to be cared for through an experience with mechanical coercive measures. A social educator has a central role in the exercise of coercion, as well as in caring for the patient throughout the process. The method is a literature study, and the problem is elucidated with the help of six selected research articles of recent date. The results from this bachelor thesis indicate that the social educator&amp;#39;s manner, presence and communication are important factors for care under mechanical coercion. Protecting the patient&amp;#39;s rights also emerges as important for feeling cared for by the social educator in a situation with mechanical coercive measures.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvangsmidler</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>34</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ola Trygve Polden</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hvordan skape en terapeutisk allianse til en pasient i psykose innlagt på tvang i akuttpsykiatrien?</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">acute psychiatry</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">akuttpsykiatri</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">authenticity</style></keyword><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%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ekthet</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">psychosis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">psykose</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">respect</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">respekt</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Terapeutisk allianse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Therapeutic alliance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tillitt</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">trust</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%">2021</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2783486/no.ntnu%3ainspera%3a81471222%3a5122356.pdf?sequence=1&amp;isAllowed=y</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">NTNU, Fakultet for medisin og helsevitenskap, Institutt for psykisk helse</style></publisher><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Tittel: Hvordan skape en terapeutisk allianse til en pasient i psykose innlagt på tvang i akuttpsykiatrien?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hensikt: Finne svar på hvordan man kan skape en terapeutisk allianse til en pasient i psykose innlagt på tvang i akuttpsykiatrien.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Metode: Utført en litteraturstudie, hvor jeg har funnet relevant teori og forskning for å hjelpe meg med å besvare min problemstilling. Har i tillegg nevnt egne erfaringer i fra praksisstudier.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Resultat: I resultatet fra forskningsartiklene jeg fant var det tre områder som gikk igjen i forskningen og som jeg mente var sentrale for å kunne inngå en terapeutisk allianse til en pasient.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;- Etablere tillitt mellom pasient og helsepersonell&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;- Pasientens autonomi under tvangsinnleggelse&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;- Ekthet og respekt i relasjoner, se mennesket utover diagnosen&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Konklusjon: I denne oppgaven kom jeg ikke frem til en tydelig og klar konklusjon på min problemstilling. Det finnes nok ingen fasitsvar på hvordan man kan skape en terapeutisk allianse til en pasient i psykose innlagt på tvang i akuttpsykiatrien. Som helsepersonell bør allikevel det å bygge en relasjon og inngå terapeutiske allianser alltid være noe å strekke seg etter i møte med pasienter.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Abstract&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Title: How to create a therapeutic alliance with a patient in psychosis forcibly admitted to acute psychiatry?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Purpose: Find answers on how to create a therapeutic alliance for a patient in psychosis admitted to compulsory psychiatric treatment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Method: Conducted a literature study, where I have found relevant theory and research to help me answer my problem. I have also mentioned my own experiences from practical studies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Result: In the results from the research articles I found, there were three areas that recurred in the research which I thought were central to being able create a therapetic alliance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;- Establish trust between patient and healthcare professionals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;- The patient`s autonomy during involuntary hospitalization.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;- Authenticity and respect in relationships, see the person beyond the diagnosis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Conclusion: In this thesis i did not come to a clear and distinct conclusion to my problem. There is probably no definitive answer on how to create a therapeutic alliance to a patient in psychosis who is forcibly admitted to acute psychiatry. However, as a healthcare professional, building a relationship and creating a therapeutic alliance should always be something to strive for in meeting patients.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bacheloroppgave</style></work-type><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>36</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tellefsen, RF</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Midtbø, MK</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Relasjonens virkning: Bruk av terapeutisk relasjon i tvangsbehandling</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">involuntary treatment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">mental disorders</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">nurse-patient relationship</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">psychiatric illness</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">psychiatric patient</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">05/2020</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2659836</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Høgskulen på Vestlandet, bachelor i sykepleie</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bergen</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Abstract&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Introduction&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Many people will experience dealing with a psychiatric illness at some point throughout their lives, some will also experience coercive measures in their treatment. How can nurses create a good therapeutic relationship to those patients? And does it increase the chance of a better treatment outcome for the patient?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Theory&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Research on literature before the analysis suggests that the therapeutic relationship does not only affect the person itself, it can also have an impact on their treatment outcome. Communication is suggested as an important part on making a positive change.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Method&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This paper is a literature search and a bachelor thesis in nursing. The search for articles was performed with the help of a PICO-model on following databases: Cinahl, Medline, Pscychinfo, and Svemed+. The analysis consists of 5 qualitative studies and 1 systematic literature search found through a citation search on Google Scholar.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Results&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Through the analysis there were found 4 underlying subjects; anatomy, trust and teamwork, the therapeutic relationships impact, perceptions and expectations of staff, and coercive measures evaluation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Discussion&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Verbal and nonverbal communication skills seemed to be important in the treatment as well as listening to the patients for a positive therapeutic relationship. Safety and respect were both mentioned as a way of meeting the patients&amp;rsquo; needs in context of the therapeutic relationship and treatment. A common ground about coercive measures seemed to matter, and the therapeutic relationship was especially important to secure good treatment using these measures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Conclusion&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Nurses can use their communication skills as a tool and the therapeutic relationship needs to be built on respect, safety, trust and a common ground to make a positive outcome in treatment with involuntary measures. Some areas discussed needs further research.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Keywords Coercion, involuntary treatment, mental disorders, psychiatric patient, psychiatric illness, nurse-patient relationship.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bachelor Thesis</style></work-type><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvangsmidler, tvangsinnleggelse, 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%">Elin Håkonsen Martinsen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bente M Weimand</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reidun Norvoll</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Does coercion matter? Supporting young next-of-kin in mental health care</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nursing Ethics</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mental Health</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">next-of-kin</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">09/2019</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;h4&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:11.0pt&quot;&gt;BACKGROUND: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;&lt;p&gt;Coercion can cause harm to both the patient and the patient&amp;#39;s family. Few studies have examined how the coercive treatment of a close relative might affect young next-of-kin.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h4&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:11.0pt&quot;&gt;RESEARCH QUESTIONS: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;&lt;p&gt;We aimed to investigate the views and experiences of health professionals being responsible for supporting young next-of-kin to patients in mental health care (children-responsible staff) in relation to the needs of these young next-of-kin in coercive situations and to identify ethical challenges.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h4&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:11.0pt&quot;&gt;RESEARCH DESIGN: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;&lt;p&gt;We conducted a qualitative study based on semistructured, focus group interviews and an individual interview.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h4&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:11.0pt&quot;&gt;PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;&lt;p&gt;We held three focus group interviews with six to seven children-responsible staff in each group (a total of 20 participants) and one individual interview with a family therapist. The participants were recruited from three hospital trusts in the eastern part of Norway.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h4&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:11.0pt&quot;&gt;ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was approved by the National Data Protection Official for Research and based on informed consent and confidentiality.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h4&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:11.0pt&quot;&gt;FINDINGS: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;&lt;p&gt;Coercion was not a theme among the participants in relation to their work with young next-of-kin, and there was much uncertainty related to whether these young people need special support to deal with the coercive treatment of their close relative. Despite the uncertainty, the study indicated a need for more information and emotional support among the youth.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h4&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:11.0pt&quot;&gt;DISCUSSION: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;&lt;p&gt;Few studies have addressed the potential impact of coercive treatment of a close family member on young next-of-kin. The findings were consistent with existing research but highlighted disagreement and uncertainty among the children-responsible staff about to what extent the young next-of-kin should visit and whether they should enter the ward unit or not. We identified ethical challenges for the children-responsible staff related to the principle of not inflicting harm (&lt;i&gt;nonmaleficence&lt;/i&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h4&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:11.0pt&quot;&gt;CONCLUSION: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:10.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:&amp;quot;Calibri&amp;quot;,sans-serif&quot;&gt;From the perspective of children-responsible staff, it appears that the coercive treatment of a close family member entails a need for extra support of young relatives both in relation to information and the facilitation of visits, but more systematic knowledge about these issues is needed.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sep 9:969733019871681</style></issue><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsmidler, Tvangsinnleggelse, Tvangsbehandling, Erfaringsbaserte</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%">Magne Brekke Rabben</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Øyvind Thomassen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Humane treatment versus means of control: coercive measures in Norwegian high-security psychiatry, 1895–1978</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">History of Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Forensic psychiatry</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">High-security</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Historical</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12/2019</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0957154X19867256</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">30</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;This article analyses the use of coercive measures in two national institutions for high-security psychiatry in Norway &amp;ndash; Kriminalasylet (Criminal Asylum) and Reitgjerdet &amp;ndash; during the period 1895&amp;ndash;1978. Historical study of coercion in psychiatry is a fruitful approach to new insight into the moral and ethical considerations within the institutions. We approach the topic through a qualitative study of patient case files and ward reports from the institutions&amp;rsquo; archives, as well as a comprehensive quantification of the coercive measures used. The data show shifting considerations of humane treatment and changes in the respect for human dignity in the institutions&amp;rsquo; practices. They also show that technological developments, such as the introduction of new psychopharmaceuticals, did not necessarily lead to higher standards of treatment.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Historical </style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">424</style></section><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsmidler, Tvangsinnleggelse, Tvangsbehandling</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%">Jorun Rugkåsa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Olav Nyttingnes</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tone Breines Simonsen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jūratė Šaltytė Benth</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bjørn Lau</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Henriette Riley</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Løvsletteng</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tore Buer Christensen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ann-Torunn Andersen Austegard</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Georg Høyer</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The use of outpatient commitment in Norway: Who are the patients and what does it involve?</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community psychiatry</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community Treatment Order</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Outpatient commitment</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252718301900</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;div&gt;Purpose&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Despite one of the longest histories of using Outpatient Commitment (OC), little is known about the use in the Norwegian context. Reporting from the Norwegian Outpatient Commitment Study, this article aims to: establish the profile of the OC population in Norway; ascertain the legal justification for the use of OC and what OC involves for patients; investigate possible associations between selected patient and service characteristics and duration of OC, and; explore potential differences based on gender or rurality.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Methods&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;A retrospective multi-site study, extracting data from the medical records of all patients on OC in six large regional hospitals in 2008&amp;ndash;12, with detailed investigation over 36 months of the subsample of patients on first ever OC-order in 2008&amp;ndash;09. We use descriptive statistics to establish the profile of the OC population and the legal justification for and the content of OC, and logistic regression to examine factors associated with duration of OC over 36 months.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Results&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;1414 patients were on OC over the 5 years, and 274 had their first OC in 2008&amp;ndash;09. The sample included more men than woman, and three-quarters were diagnosed with schizophrenia. They had long service histories, including involuntary admissions. The legal justification for all OC-orders was the need for treatment, and 18% were additionally justified by dangerousness. The option to initiate OC directly from the community was not used in any of the 274 first ever OC-orders. While 98% of patients were prescribed psychotropic medication, under half had an Involuntary Treatment Order, which under the Norwegian OC regime is required in addition to the OC-order to oblige patients to accept treatment (usually medication). 60% of patients had &amp;ge;2 clinical contacts monthly. There were some gender differences in descriptive analyses with men generally being worse off, but no clear pattern in terms of rurality. Patients in the sample had been on OC between one week and 20 years. The median duration of OC over 36 months was 365 days. Three factors contributed to longer duration: the use of the dangerousness criterion; a diagnosis of schizophrenia disorder, and; considerable problems with substance abuse.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Conclusion&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;The characteristics of the OC population in Norway are very similar to that reported in other jurisdictions. Medication seems to be the central focus of OC, yet additional Involuntary Treatment Orders are imposed for less than half of patients. While all OC-orders were justified by the need to ensure treatment, risk seems to be a concern for a subgroup of patients who are kept on for longer. How the 2017 amendment to the mental health act, which precludes compulsion for competent patients unless danger is present, will affect OC use, remains to be seen. Further studies should specifically focus on variation in the use of OC, including at the level of individual clinicians.&lt;/div&gt;</style></abstract><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</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%">Reitan, Solveig Klæbo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Helvik, Anne-Sofie</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Iversen, Valentina</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Use of mechanical and pharmacological restraint over an eight-year period and its relation to clinical factors</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">mechanical</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pharmacological</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Restraint</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">variation</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2017</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">09/2017</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08039488.2017.1373854</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">72</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">24-30</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p xmlns:mml=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML&quot; xmlns:oasis=&quot;http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table&quot; xmlns:xsi=&quot;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;Background:&lt;/b&gt;&amp;nbsp;Use of restraint and finding the balance between security and ethics is a continuous dilemma in clinical psychiatry. In daily clinic and in planning health-care service, knowledge on the characteristics of restraint situations is necessary to optimize its use and avoid abuse.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p xmlns:mml=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML&quot; xmlns:oasis=&quot;http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table&quot; xmlns:xsi=&quot;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;Methods:&lt;/b&gt;&amp;nbsp;We describe characteristics in the use of pharmacological and mechanical restraint in psychiatric acute wards in a hospital in Middle Norway over an eight-year period. Data on all cases of mechanical and pharmacological restraint from 2004 to 2011 were retrospectively collected from hand-written protocols. Complementary information on the patients was obtained from the hospital patient administrative system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p xmlns:mml=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML&quot; xmlns:oasis=&quot;http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table&quot; xmlns:xsi=&quot;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;Results:&lt;/b&gt;&amp;nbsp;Restraint in acute wards was used on 13 persons per 100,000 inhabitants annually. The percentage of admitted patients exposed to restraint was 1.7%, with a mean of 4.5 cases per exposed patient. Frequency per 100 admitted patients varied from 3.7 (in 2007) to 10 (in 2009). The majority of restraint cases concerned male patients under 50 years and with substance-abuse, psychotic, or affective disorders. Significantly more coercive means were used during daytime compared to night and morning. There was a significant increase in pharmacological coercion during spring and mechanical coercion during summer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p xmlns:mml=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML&quot; xmlns:oasis=&quot;http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table&quot; xmlns:xsi=&quot;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/b&gt;&amp;nbsp;Restraint was used on 1.7% of admitted patients, representing 13 per 100,000 inhabitants per year. Use of restraint was higher during certain periods of the day and was associated with the patient&amp;rsquo;s diagnosis, age, gender, and legal status of hospitalization. There was a marked variation over the years.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">24</style></section><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsmidler</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%">Adrian R. Pasereanu</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anne Opsal</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jon-Kåre Vederhus</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Øistein Kristensen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Thomas Clausen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Quality of life improved following in-patient substance use disorder treatment</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Quality of Life</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Substance Abuse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SUD</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">03/2015</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-51401</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Background&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Quality of life (QoL) is increasingly recognized as central to the broad construct of recovery in patients with substance use disorders (SUD). However, few longitudinal studies have evaluated changes in QoL after SUD treatment and included patients with SUD that were compulsorily hospitalized. This study aimed to describe QoL among in-patients admitted either voluntarily or compulsorily to hospitalization and to examine patterns and predictors of QoL at admission and at 6 months post treatment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Methods&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This prospective study followed 202 hospitalized patients with SUD that were admitted voluntarily (N=137) or compulsorily (N=65). A generic QoL questionnaire (QoL-5) was used to assess QoL domains. Regression analysis was conducted to identify associations with QoL at baseline and to examine predictors of change in QoL at a 6-month follow-up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Results&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The majority of patients had seriously impaired QoL. Low QoL at baseline was associated with a high psychiatric symptom burden. Fifty-eight percent of patients experienced a positive QoL change at follow-up. Although the improvement in QoL was significant, it was considered modest (a mean 0.06 improvement in QoL-5 scores at follow-up; 95% confidence interval: 0.03 - 0.09; p&amp;lt;0.001). Patients admitted voluntarily and compulsorily showed QoL improvements of similar magnitude. Female gender was associated with a large, clinically relevant improvement in QoL at follow-up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Conclusions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In-patient SUD treatment improved QoL at six month follow-up. These findings showed that QoL measurements were useful for providing evidence of therapeutic benefit in the SUD field.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>