Table 2.
Type of coercion and reasoning.
| Characteristics | Hospital | Total | % of total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| University Hospital Basel (USB) | Psychiatric Hospitals of the University Basel (UPK) | |||
| Coercion as main issue in EC | (n = 50) | (n = 50) | (n = 100) | |
| Yes | 10 | 14 | 24 | – |
| No | 40 | 36 | 76 | – |
| Type of coercion addressed* | (n = 10) | (n = 14) | (n = 24) | (n = 24) |
| Involuntary committal | 5 | 7 | 12 | 50.0% |
| Compulsory treatment | 7 | 10 | 17 | 70.8% |
| Measures restricting liberty | 2 | 2 | 4 | 16.6% |
| Type of coercion according to conclusion* | ||||
| Involuntary committal | 3 | 3 | 6 | 25.0% |
| Compulsory treatment | 2 | 3 | 5 | 20.8% |
| Measures restricting liberty | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4.2% |
| Previous involuntary committal | ||||
| Yes | 3 | 7 | 10 | 41.7% |
| No | 7 | 7 | 14 | 58.3% |
| Request includes issue coercion | ||||
| Yes, explicitly | 2 | 5 | 7 | 29.2% |
| Yes, implicitly | 2 | 4 | 6 | 25.0% |
| No | 6 | 5 | 11 | 45.8% |
| Reasons pro coercion* | ||||
| Respect for autonomy | 6 | 10 | 16 | 66.7% |
| Beneficence | 10 | 14 | 24 | 100% |
| Non-maleficence | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4.2% |
| Justice | 3 | 4 | 7 | 29.2% |
| Reasons con coercion* | ||||
| Respect for autonomy | 6 | 14 | 20 | 83.3% |
| Beneficence | 4 | 8 | 12 | 50.0% |
| Non-maleficence | 3 | 5 | 8 | 33.3% |
| Justice | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4.2% |
*Multiple selection possible.