PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 29, 2026Nordic Journal of Psychiatry0 citations

Perceived intrusiveness of coercive measures: a Danish survey of mental health service users

View Full Paper
CLCamilla LindekildeLSLonny StokholmJHJacob Hvidhjelm

Key Points

  • This research aims to understand mental health service users' perceptions of the intrusiveness of various coercive measures.
  • Conducted a cross-sectional survey of mental health service users
  • Developed the survey in consultation with users, using a visual analogue scale for ratings
  • Analyzed data descriptively and statistically with non-parametric tests
  • Of 8,250 eligible participants, 1,367 (16.6%) completed the survey
  • Constant observation, time-out, and chemical restraint rated as less intrusive; seclusion and mechanical restraint rated as more intrusive
  • Female and younger participants rated all interventions as more intrusive

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Coercive measures (CM) are commonly used in mental health care. From a mental health service user perspective, CM are often associated with physical and psychological harm and a serious infringement on personal autonomy. Danish health legislation, therefore, adheres to principles requiring the use of the least intrusive CM. However, limited knowledge exists about service users' perceptions of what constitutes the least intrusive CM. PURPOSE: To survey mental health service users' perceptions of intrusiveness related to various CM and to identify which interventions they consider the least intrusive. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted, which was developed in consultation with mental health service users, inspired by previous international research. Perceived intrusiveness was rated on a 0-10 visual analogue scale (VAS). Data were analysed descriptively and statistically using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: Of 8,250 eligible participants, 1,367 (16.6%) completed the survey. Ratings revealed two clusters: constant observation, time-out, and chemical restraint were perceived as less intrusive, while seclusion and mechanical restraint (belt alone or with straps) were rated as more intrusive. Female participants, younger participants, and those who have prior CM experience consistently rated all interventions as more intrusive. CONCLUSION: Rather than identifying a single most or least intrusive measure, the findings suggest a broader distinction between types of CM. Two clusters emerged-those generally perceived as more intrusive and those perceived as less so. This pattern may inform future clinical decision-making and policy development, highlighting the need for further research into subjective, modifiable factors that shape service users lived experiences.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Lindekilde et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a192d7efab5b468c44166b1https://doi.org/10.1080/08039488.2026.2670367
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper