@article{ref1,
title="Involuntary treatment in Europe: different countries, different practices",
journal="Current opinion in psychiatry",
year="2012",
author="Jacobsen, Torsten B.",
volume="25",
number="4",
pages="307-310",
abstract="PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Involuntary treatment is burdened by the lack of evidence. One of the challenges is the difference in practice across borders in Europe. While reviewing the current literature, a proposal of monitoring guidelines is discussed. RECENT FINDINGS: The field is characterized by a small number of dedicated researchers. A study of violence in first-episode psychosis shows that differences in criteria for involuntary admission lead to different prognosis for the patients. The most recent contributions from the cross-national EUNOMIA study point to great variation across countries, regarding frequencies of involuntary admission as well as outcome. The EUNOMIA study provides suggestions for good quality in involuntary admission. A Cochrane review has examined the evidence of involuntary community treatment compared with standard treatment. The effectiveness of involuntary community treatment is limited. The review concludes that the benefits for a small number of patients are outweighed by the high numbers needed to treat in terms of avoided re-admission. SUMMARY: Despite pioneering work, involuntary treatment is still caught up in tradition. There is a lack of standard and proof of effectiveness. A proposal of monitoring guidelines for involuntary measures is a first step to improve the situation.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0951-7367",
doi="10.1097/YCO.0b013e32835462e3",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0b013e32835462e3"
}