Involuntary commitment and medical education on mental health diseases across Europe

Abstract

Abstract Background Psychiatric diseases are projected to become one of the greatest contributors to the global burden of disease by 2030, already presenting as one of the principal causes of DALYs lost in Europe. Given the particular nature of psychiatric disorders, national legislatures have been enacted by each European country regarding the possibility of involuntary psychiatric treatment. As practical implementations vary greatly from country to country, we wish to analyse how different attitudes to involuntary treatment affect health outcomes, so as to propose a uniform guideline for European medical practitioners. We also wish to analyse whether medical education targeted at communication with psychiatric patients has an effect on involuntary treatment rates and general mental well-being. Methods We conducted a systematic review on PubMed to identify studies pertaining to how legislature on involuntary commitment varies between European countries, as well as to what extent it is utilised. We also looked at the extent of medical education on psychiatric diseases. Results Preliminary results show that involuntary hospitalisation rates vary greatly within Europe, with certain countries being almost 20 times more likely to utilise such measures than others, notwithstanding similar mental illness prevalence. Results do not seem correlated to legislation types. Conclusions Given the vastly different use of involuntary commitment, a more standardised European approach should be implemented, especially in sight of the growing prevalence and burden of disease of psychiatric illnesses. Furthermore, an often-overlooked aspect of medical education is how to understand and communicate effectively with patients dealing with mental diseases: we advocate for continuous education, regardless of medical specialty. Key messages • Involuntary hospitalisation rates vary greatly across Europe, but the effects of this phenomenon have been poorly studied. We propose a more unified approach to maximise the efficacy of such a law. • We advocate for a more thorough education of health professionals on mental illnesses, regardless of medical specialty, in sight of the growing prevalence of such diseases.