CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 204Healthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsPsychiatric care and mental health servicesHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Involuntary vs. voluntary hospital admission: A systematic literature review on outcome diversity

Kallert, Thomas W., Glöckner, Matthias, Schützwohl, Matthias·2008·European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
DOI 10.1007/s00406-007-0777-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article systematically reviews the literature on the outcome of acute hospitalization for adult general psychiatric patients admitted involuntarily as compared to patients admitted voluntarily. Inclusion and exclusion criteria qualified 41 out of 3,227 references found in Medline and PSYNDEXplus literature searches for this review. The authors independently rated these articles on six pre-defined indicators of research quality, carried out statistical comparisons ex-post facto where not reported, and computed for each adequate result the effect size index d for the comparison of means, and the Phi- or contingency coefficient for cross-tabulated data. Methodological quality of the studies, coming mostly from North American and European countries, showed significant variation and was higher concerning service-related than clinical or subjective outcomes. Main deficits appeared in sample size estimation, lack of clear follow-up time-points, and the absence of standardized instruments used to assess clinical outcomes. Length of stay, readmission risk, and risk of involuntary readmission were at least equal or greater for involuntary patients. Involuntary patients showed no increased mortality, but did have higher suicide rates than voluntary patients. Further, involuntary patients demonstrated lower levels of social functioning, and equal levels of general psychopathology and treatment compliance; they were more dissatisfied with treatment and more frequently felt that hospitalization was not justified. Future methodologically-sound studies exploring this topic should focus on patient populations not represented here. Further research should also clarify if the legal admission status is sufficiently valid for differentiating the outcome of acute hospitalization.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00406-007-0777-4

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Bruns G (1991) Compulsorily admitted in-patients – a psychiatric high-risk population (in German). Nervenarzt 62:308–312
  2. Kallert TW, Torres-González F (eds) (2006) Legislation on coercive mental health care in Europe. Legal documents and comparative assessment of twelve European countries. Peter Lang Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt/M
  3. Pieters V (2003) Macht - Zwang - Sinn. Subjektives Erleben, Behandlungsbewertungen und Therapieerfolge bei gerichtlichen Unterbringungen schizophrener Menschen. Psychiatrie-Verlag, Bonn
  4. Waller H, Bauer M, Berner W, Katschnig H, Uchtenhagen A (1982) Zwangseinweisung in der Psychiatrie - Zur Situation in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, in Österreich und in der Schweiz. Hans Huber, Bern Stuttgart Wien, pp 103–151
  5. Westrin CG, Nilstun T, Axelsson M, Candefjord IL, Kjellin L, Ekblom B, Eriksson K, Östman O (1990) An empirical study of commitment and involuntary treatment in Sweden. In: Stefanis CN (ed) Psychiatry: a world perspective, vol 4. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 789–803
  6. Working Party on Psychiatry and Human Rights (2000) “White paper” on the protection of the human rights and dignity of people suffering from mental disorder, especially those placed as involuntary patients in a psychiatric establishment. Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, Brussels

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 204

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kallert, T. W., Glöckner, M., & Schützwohl, M.
Affiliations
Technische Universität Dresden (DE)
Corresponding author
Kallert, Thomas W.
ORCID
Schützwohl, Matthias
Venue
European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2007-12-13
Volume
258
Issue
4
Pages
195-209
ISSN
  • 0003-9373 (ISSN-L)
  • 0940-1334
  • 1433-8491
DOI
10.1007/s00406-007-0777-4
OpenAlex
W1983638876
Cited by
204
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 11
FWCI
0.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Historical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Keywords
involuntary admission, acute psychiatric hospitalization, length of hospital stay, hospital readmission, suicide risk, mortality, social functioning, medication adherence, treatment satisfaction, outcome comparison
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Hospitalization, Humans, Patient Admission, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

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