Thomas W. Kallert

TL;DR: Coercive measures used in a substantial group of involuntarily admitted patients across Europe appeared to depend on diagnosis and the severity of illness, but use was also heavily influenced by the individual country.

TL;DR: Methodological quality of the studies showed significant variation and was higher concerning service-related than clinical or subjective outcomes; main deficits appeared in sample size estimation, lack of clear follow-up time-points, and the absence of standardized instruments used to assess clinical outcomes.

TL;DR: Institutions should, ideally, be community based, operate a flexible regime, maintain a low density of residents and maximise residents' privacy, and attention should be paid to service users' physical health through regular screening.

TL;DR: Clinical factors, such as high levels of psychotic symptoms and high level of perceived coercion at admission were associated with the use of coercive measures, when controlling for countries’ effect.

TL;DR: International differences in legislation and practice may be relevant to outcomes and inform improvements in policies, particularly in countries with poorer outcomes.