<?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%">Richter, D</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tilman, S</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Can coercion in psychiatry be justified? A theoretical adversarial collaboration approach</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Journal of Law and Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2025</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252725001049?dgcid=author</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">105</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Bruk av tvang i psykiatrien er et av de mest kontroversielle temaene i moderne helsevesen. Det finnes kliniske, juridiske og etiske argumenter både for å avskaffe og for å rettferdiggjøre tvang i psykiatrien. Argumentasjonene er ofte diametralt motsatte, slik at det virker vanskelig å videreutvikle diskusjonen. For å løse denne utilfredsstillende situasjonen har vi brukt en tilnærming som kalles &amp;laquo;adversarial collaboration&amp;raquo; (motstridende samarbeid) på dette temaet. De to forfatterne representerer fundamentalt forskjellige synspunkter på spørsmålet om legitimering av tvang i psykiatrien. Gjennom en metodisk styrt utveksling av argumenter ble det utviklet en rekke konsensus-hypoteser, dissens-hypoteser og generelle konsensus-hypoteser med dissens i detalj. De viktigste funnene inkluderer det faktum at antagonistene argumenterer fra helt forskjellige utgangspunkt i kjernen av argumentasjonen, nemlig generelle argumenter kontra individuelle kliniske tilfeller. I tillegg har antagonistene konsistente standpunkter på mange temaer. Det kan derfor konkluderes med at både de som er for og de som er imot avskaffelse av tvang i psykiatrien, argumenterer med gode intensjoner.&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%">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>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%">Løvsletten, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Husum, T. L.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Haug, E.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Granerud, A.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cooperation in the mental health treatment of patients with outpatient commitment</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SAGE Open Medicine</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Outpatient commitment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD</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://doi.org/10.1177/2050312120926410</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;h2&gt;Background:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;Patients with outpatient commitment have a decision on coercive treatment from the specialist health services even if they are in their own home and receive municipal health services.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h2&gt;Objective:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The aim of this study is to gain more knowledge about how the outpatient commitment system works in the municipal health service and specialist health services, and how they collaborate with patients and across service levels from the perspectives of healthcare professionals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h2&gt;Methods:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a qualitative study collecting data through focus group interviews with health personnel from the municipal health service and specialist health services.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h2&gt;Results:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The results describe the health personnel&amp;rsquo;s experiences with follow-up and interactions with the patients with outpatient commitment decisions, and their experiences with collaboration between service levels.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h2&gt;Conclusion:&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study show that outpatient commitment makes a difference in the way patients with this decision are followed up. The legislative amendment with new requirements for consent competence was challenging. Collaboration between services levels was also challenging.&lt;/p&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>32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stuen, HK</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community Treatment Orders in an Assertive Community Treatment setting: a qualitative study of patients, care providers and responsible clinicians</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ACT</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Community Treatment Order</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%">06/2019</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://hdl.handle.net/10037/16695</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">UiT - Norges arktiske universitet (Open Access)</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tromsø</style></pub-location><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">978-82-7589-649-8</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;This study is part of the national research-based evaluation of the 12 first assertive community treatment (ACT) teams in Norway. ACT is a model for multidisciplinary community-based treatment teams that aim to provide a full range of medical, psychosocial and rehabilitation services to people with severe mental illness. Over 30% of the patients treated in the ACT teams were subject to community treatment orders (CTOs) at intake during the teams&amp;rsquo; first year of operation. CTOs, which is a legal tool to compel patients with severe mental illness to adhere to outpatient treatment, have been widely used since the Norwegian Mental Health Care Act was implemented in 1961. Previous studies have shown that patients consider CTOs as a more restrictive intervention than clinicians do. Many patients experience CTOs as disempowering, and many patients feel that clinicians&amp;rsquo; one-sided focus on medication impedes their recovery processes. In this qualitative study, Stuen and colleagues investigated how patients, ACT providers and responsible clinicians experienced CTOs and CTO decision making within the context of the relatively newly established ACT teams. Stuen and colleagues show that patients have mixed views of CTOs. However, the ACT team&amp;rsquo;s availability, the flexible combination of interventions, continued care, support and possibility to make choices were described as important improvements compared to traditional office-based mental health services. Several of the participants described a gradual transition toward regarding the CTO as an acceptable solution, provided that they received other services they found beneficial. For clinicians, CTO decisions involve dilemmas and difficult professional judgements, and they highlighted the opportunities the multidisciplinary team provided for discussions and shared responsibility for follow-up care. The ACT model&amp;rsquo;s structured approach, the daily team meetings and the sharing of ideas about how to handle clinical problems allowed for more flexibility and, they believed, more voluntary options.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Article collection</style></work-type><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%">Torkil Berge</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kjersti Sunniva Bjøntegård</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Petter Ekern</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Martin Furan</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nils Inge Landrø</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Grete J. Sølvberg Larsen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kåre Osnes</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Inger Selvaag</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anne Helene Vedlog</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercive mental health care – dilemmas in the decision-making process</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsinnleggelser</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvungent psykisk helsevern</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">08/2018</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://tidsskriftet.no/en/2018/08/originalartikkel/coercive-mental-health-care-dilemmas-decision-making-process</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;h3&gt;BACKGROUND&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;The use of coercive mental health care contravenes the principle of voluntary examination and treatment. However, it should be possible for persons at acute risk to receive imperative health assistance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3&gt;MATERIAL AND METHOD&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;After evaluating 37 emergency interviews in psychiatric outpatient clinics where the use of coercive mental health care was considered, interviews were conducted with psychiatric triage clinicians.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3&gt;RESULTS&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study includes interviews that resulted in involuntary hospitalisation (n = 15), coerced observation (n = 2), voluntary hospitalisation (n = 14) and follow-up by the outpatient clinic (n = 6). Important factors in assessing the use of coercion were the severity of psychotic symptoms, suicide risk and risk for others, and difficult social circumstances. Three-quarters of psychiatric triage clinicians were in some degree of doubt, and 16 out of 37 experienced uneasiness during the assessment. With a view to enhancing the patient&amp;rsquo;s perception of having been met with respect, the triage clinicians emphasised the need for the patient&amp;rsquo;s opinion to be heard. Where the triage clinicians were in doubt, a number of professional and ethical issues were highlighted in the process of reaching a decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;h3&gt;DISCUSSION&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;p&gt;Latitude should be given for ethical and professional reflection in relation to assessing the use of coercion in daily clinical practice, as well as training in measures to reinforce patients&amp;rsquo; experience of participation during the interview.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tvangsinnleggelse</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stensrud, B.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hoyer, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Beston, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Granerud, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Landheim, A. S.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&quot;Care or control?&quot;: a qualitative study of staff experiences with outpatient commitment orders</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26873613</style></url></web-urls></urls><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">0933-7954</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TUD, 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%">Irene Syse</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reidun Førde</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reidar Pedersen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Clinical ethics committees – also for mental health care? The Norwegian experience</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Clinical Ethics</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2-3</style></number><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Etikk</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Astrid Furre</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Leiv Sandvik</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sonja Heyerdahl</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Svein Friis</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Knutzen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ketil Hanssen-Bauer</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Characteristics of Adolescents Subjected to Restraint in Acute Psychiatric Units in Norway: A Case-Control Study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PubMed</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24980114</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><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%">Rigmor Diseth</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Per Høglend</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Compulsory mental health care in Norway: The treatment criterion</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Journal of Law and Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252713001039</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsbehandling, 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%">Roaldset, J. O.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hartvig, P.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bjørkly, S.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Can lipid analysis help identify repeatedly violent patients after discharge from acute psychiatry?</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psychiatry Research</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><notes><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">In this study of 196 patients discharged from an acute psychiatric ward, 11 patients (6%) were identified as exhibiting repeated violence and having frequent readmissions. Compared with non-violent patients and those with only one violent post-discharge episode, repeatedly violent patients were significantly characterised by male gender, higher rates of previous threats of violence, lack of empathy, more severe violence during follow-up, and lower high-density lipoprotein levels. © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.</style></notes><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Annet</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%">Maria Knutzen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stål Bjørkly</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gunnar Eidhammer</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Steinar Lorentzen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nina Helen Mjøsund</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stein Opjordsmoen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Leiv Sandvik</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Svein Friis</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Characteristics of patients frequently subjected to pharmacological and mechanical restraint—A register study in three Norwegian acute psychiatric wards</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psychiatry Research</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165178113006756</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsbehandling 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%">Inger B Larsen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Toril B. Terkelsen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion in a locked psychiatric ward: Perspectives of patients and staff</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nursing Ethics</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://nej.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/10/03/0969733013503601.abstract</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsbehandling, Tvangsmidler</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rigmor Randi Diseth</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Compulsory Mental Health Care in Norway: A Study of the Interface between the Law and Psychiatry</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Det medisinske fakultet</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/35828/dravhandling-diseth.pdf?sequence=1</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Universitetet i Oslo</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">DUO</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Etikk, Tvangsinnleggelse</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bak Jesper</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Helle Aggernæs</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion within Danish psychiatry compared with 10 other European countries</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nordic Journal of Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08039488.2011.632645</style></url></web-urls></urls><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></number><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">66</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsinnleggelse, Tvangsmidler, 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%">Jan Norum</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Aina Olsen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Inger Nybrodahl</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Knut W. Sørgaard</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Compulsory and voluntary admission in psychiatric hospitals in northern Norway 2009–2010. A national registry-based analysis</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nordic Journal of Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08039488.2012.675589</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsinnleggelse</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Knutzen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nina H. Mjosund</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gunnar Eidhammer</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Steinar Lorentzen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stein Opjordsmoen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Leiv Sandvik</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Svein Friis</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Characteristics of Psychiatric Inpatients Who Experienced Restraint and Those Who Did Not: A Case-Control Study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psychiatric Services</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://ps.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=116187</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><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%">Valentina Cabral Iversen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">John E. Berg</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">R. Småvik</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Arne Einar Vaaler</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Clinical differences between immigrants voluntarily and involuntarily admitted to acute psychiatric units: a 3‐year prospective study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health NursingJournal of psychiatric and mental health nursing</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">18</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsinnleggelse</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tonje Lossius Husum</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Johan H. Bjørngaard</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Arnstein Finset</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Torleif Ruud</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A cross-sectional prospective study of seclusion, restraint and involuntary medication in acute psychiatric wards: Patient, staff and ward characteristics.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BMC Health Services Research (Open Access)</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/10/89</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><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>32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Knut Ivar Iversen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion in the delivery of mental health services in Norway</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Institutt for samfunnsmedisin</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2008</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://ask.bibsys.no/ask/action/show?pid=080964206&amp;kid=biblio</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Universitetet i tromsø</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BIBSYS</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Doktor</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><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>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Knut Ivar Iversen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Georg Høyer</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Harold C. Sexton</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion and patients atisfaction on psychiatric acute wards</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Journal of Law and Psychiatry</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2007</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252707000593</style></url></web-urls></urls><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6</style></number><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">30</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Etikk, Tvangsmidler, 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%">Rolf Wynn</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Coercion in psychiatric care: clinical, legal, and ethical controversies</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2006</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13651500600650026</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Etikk</style></label></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Trond Hatling</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Trond Krogen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pål Ulleberg</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Compulsory admissions to psychiatric hospitals in Norway-international comparisons and regional variations</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Mental Health</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2002</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09638230021000058184?journalCode=jmh</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><label><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tvangsinnleggelse</style></label></record></records></xml>