"Voluntary in quotation marks": a conceptual model of psychological pressure in mental healthcare based on a grounded theory analysis of interviews with service users.
Communication
Informal coercion
Informed consent
Perceived coercion
Psychiatry
Qualitative research
Treatment pressure
Voluntariness
Journal
BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 03 2022
17 03 2022
Historique:
received:
06
05
2021
accepted:
22
02
2022
entrez:
17
3
2022
pubmed:
18
3
2022
medline:
27
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Psychological pressure refers to communicative strategies used by professionals and informal caregivers to influence the decision-making of service users and improve their adherence to recommended treatment or social rules. This phenomenon is also commonly referred to as informal coercion or treatment pressure. Empirical studies indicated that psychological pressure is common in mental healthcare services. No generally accepted definition of psychological pressure is available to date. A first conceptual analysis of psychological pressure focused on staff communication to promote treatment adherence and distinguished between persuasion, interpersonal leverage, inducements and threats. The aim of this study was to develop a conceptual model of psychological pressure based on the perspectives of service users. Data were collected by means of semi-structured interviews. The sample consisted of 14 mental health service users with a self-reported psychiatric diagnosis and prior experience with coercion in mental healthcare. We used theoretical sampling and contacted participants via mental healthcare services and self-help groups to ensure a variety of attitudes toward the mental healthcare system in the sample. The study was conducted in Germany from October 2019 to January 2020. Data were analyzed according to grounded theory methodology. The study indicated that psychological pressure is used not only to improve service users' adherence to recommended treatment but also to improve their adherence to social rules; that it is exerted not only by mental health professionals but also by relatives and friends; and that the extent to which service users perceive communication as involving psychological pressure depends strongly on contextual factors. Relevant contextual factors were the way of communicating, the quality of the personal relationship, the institutional setting, the material surroundings and the level of convergence between the parties' understanding of mental disorder. The results of the study highlight the importance of staff communication training and organizational changes for reducing the use of psychological pressure in mental healthcare services.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Psychological pressure refers to communicative strategies used by professionals and informal caregivers to influence the decision-making of service users and improve their adherence to recommended treatment or social rules. This phenomenon is also commonly referred to as informal coercion or treatment pressure. Empirical studies indicated that psychological pressure is common in mental healthcare services. No generally accepted definition of psychological pressure is available to date. A first conceptual analysis of psychological pressure focused on staff communication to promote treatment adherence and distinguished between persuasion, interpersonal leverage, inducements and threats.
AIM
The aim of this study was to develop a conceptual model of psychological pressure based on the perspectives of service users.
METHODS
Data were collected by means of semi-structured interviews. The sample consisted of 14 mental health service users with a self-reported psychiatric diagnosis and prior experience with coercion in mental healthcare. We used theoretical sampling and contacted participants via mental healthcare services and self-help groups to ensure a variety of attitudes toward the mental healthcare system in the sample. The study was conducted in Germany from October 2019 to January 2020. Data were analyzed according to grounded theory methodology.
RESULTS
The study indicated that psychological pressure is used not only to improve service users' adherence to recommended treatment but also to improve their adherence to social rules; that it is exerted not only by mental health professionals but also by relatives and friends; and that the extent to which service users perceive communication as involving psychological pressure depends strongly on contextual factors. Relevant contextual factors were the way of communicating, the quality of the personal relationship, the institutional setting, the material surroundings and the level of convergence between the parties' understanding of mental disorder.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the study highlight the importance of staff communication training and organizational changes for reducing the use of psychological pressure in mental healthcare services.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35296288
doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-03810-9
pii: 10.1186/s12888-022-03810-9
pmc: PMC8928679
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
186Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Int J Law Psychiatry. 1995 Summer;18(3):249-63
pubmed: 7591396
Soc Sci Med. 2019 Feb;223:89-96
pubmed: 30739039
BMC Res Notes. 2019 Dec 2;12(1):787
pubmed: 31791408
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2019 May 10;116(19):336-343
pubmed: 31288909
Psychiatry Res. 2014 Jan 30;215(1):120-6
pubmed: 24210740
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2015 Aug;50(8):1297-308
pubmed: 25720809
Psychiatr Serv. 2011 May;62(5):465-70
pubmed: 21532070
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2013 Mar-Apr;36(2):100-6
pubmed: 23399315
Nurs Ethics. 2014 Jun;21(4):426-36
pubmed: 24106262
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2020 Jul;142(1):27-39
pubmed: 31953847
Psychiatry Res. 2014 Dec 30;220(3):1007-11
pubmed: 25249438
Front Psychiatry. 2016 Dec 12;7:197
pubmed: 28018248
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2021 Mar-Apr;75:101680
pubmed: 33609996
Front Psychiatry. 2015 Oct 28;6:153
pubmed: 26578985
J Med Ethics. 2012 Apr;38(4):204-9
pubmed: 22138728
Psychiatry Res. 2018 Apr;262:400-406
pubmed: 28958458
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2002 Mar-Apr;25(2):93-108
pubmed: 12071105
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Apr 25;8:92
pubmed: 18439254
Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 May;6(5):403-417
pubmed: 30954479
Eur Psychiatry. 2020 Aug 24;63(1):e82
pubmed: 32829740
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2020 Nov - Dec;73:101645
pubmed: 33246221
Br J Psychiatry. 2020 Aug 27;:1-11
pubmed: 32847633
Am J Psychiatry. 1998 Sep;155(9):1254-60
pubmed: 9734551
Psychiatr Serv. 2010 Oct;61(10):1012-7
pubmed: 20889640
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2006 Jan-Feb;29(1):36-47
pubmed: 16309742
Soc Sci Med. 2016 May;156:204-11
pubmed: 27054304
Nervenarzt. 2019 Jul;90(7):690-694
pubmed: 31073672
Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2018 Oct;32(5):662-669
pubmed: 30201193
Behav Sci Law. 1993 Summer;11(3):281-93
pubmed: 10150231
Am J Psychiatry. 2002 May;159(5):705-12
pubmed: 11986120