CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Healthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsPsychiatric care and mental health servicesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Short-term outcome of inpatient psychiatric care—impact of coercion and treatment characteristics

Wallsten, Tuula, Kjellin, Lars, Lindström, Leif·2006·Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
DOI 10.1007/s00127-006-0131-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Aims Little is known about the outcome of brief inpatient treatment interventions in routine psychiatric practice. The aim of this article was to study if subjective and assessed outcome of brief psychiatric inpatient care are related to patient characteristics, coercion at admission and during care, and other treatment characteristics.Method A total of 233 involuntarily and voluntarily admitted patients were interviewed within 5 days from admission and at discharge or after 3 weeks of care. Outcome was measured as reported by patients and by change in GAF (Global Assessment Scale) scores.Results Predictors for a positive subjective outcome were if the patients reported that they had been well treated by the staff and had contact persons at the ward. Predictors for a GAF improvement were a low GAF score at admission and a mood disorder diagnosis.Conclusions Subjectively reported outcome and outcome measured by assessing change in level of functioning differed. Coercion was not related to outcome. The way the patient perceived they had been treated by the staff was strongly related to subjective outcome.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00127-006-0131-6

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some studies found greater improvements in clinical symptoms and functioning than for voluntary patients.

    “In general, these studies found either no difference in the clinical effects of involuntary admission (27,40–45) or greater improvements in clinical symptoms and functioning than for voluntary patients (46,47).”

    From The benefits and harms of inpatient involuntary psychiatric treatment: a scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [46]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wallsten, T., Kjellin, L., & Lindström, L.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Wallsten, Tuula
ORCID
Kjellin, Lars
Venue
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2006-11-01
Volume
41
Issue
12
Pages
975-980
ISSN
  • 0933-7954 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-9285
DOI
10.1007/s00127-006-0131-6
OpenAlex
W2061546713
Cited by
48
References
19
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
psychiatric inpatient care, treatment outcomes, coercion, involuntary admission, voluntary admission, patient satisfaction, staff-patient relationship, Global Assessment Scale, mood disorders, level of functioning, patient-reported outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Coercion, Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric Disorders, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Inpatients, Male, Professional-Patient Relations, Prognosis, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Quality of Health Care, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review