Patients’ experiences with coercive mental health treatment in Flexible Assertive Community Treatment: a qualitative study

Author:

Brekke Eva,Clausen Hanne,Brodahl Morten,Landheim Anne S.

Abstract

Abstract Background Flexible Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) teams have been implemented in Norwegian health and social services over the last years, partly aiming to reduce coercive mental health treatment. We need knowledge about how service users experience coercion within the FACT context. The aim of this paper is to explore service user experiences of coercive mental health treatment in the context of FACT and other treatment contexts they have experienced. Are experiences of coercion different in FACT than in other treatment contexts? If this is the case, which elements of FACT lead to a different experience? Method Within a participatory approach, 24 qualitative interviews with service users in five different FACT teams were analyzed with thematic analysis. Results Participants described negative experiences with formal and informal coercion. Three patterns of experiences with coercion in FACT were identified: FACT as clearly a change for the better, making the best of FACT, and finding that coercion is just as bad in FACT as it was before. Safety, improved quality of treatment, and increased participation were described as mechanisms that can prevent coercion. Conclusion Results from this study support the argument that coercion is at odds with human rights and therefore should be avoided as far as possible. Results suggest that elements of the FACT model may prevent the use of coercion by promoting safety, improved quality of treatment and increased participation.

Funder

The Research Council of Norway

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

Reference62 articles.

1. Püras, D. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. Geneva, United Nations; 2017.

2. World Health Organization and the Gulbenkian Global Mental Health Platform. Innovation in deinstitutionalization: a WHO expert survey. Geneva, World Health Organization; 2014.

3. Martinelli A, Iozzino L, Ruggeri M, Marston L, Killaspy H. Mental health supported accommodation services in England and in Italy: a comparison. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2019;54(11):1419–27.

4. Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services. St prp nr 63 (1997-98). Om opptrappingsplan for psykisk helse 1999–2006. Endringer i statsbudsjettet for 1998 [Proposition no 63 (1997–1998). On the Escalation Plan for Mental Health 1999–2006. Changes in the state budget for 1998]. Oslo, Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services; 1998.

5. Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services. Meld St 23 (2022–2023). Opptrappingsplan for psykisk helse 2023–2033 [White paper no 23 (2022-2023). Escalation Plan for Mental Health 2023-2033]. Oslo, Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services; 2023.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3