Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology

, Volume 49, Issue 2, pp 283–290 | Cite as

A prediction model for the incidence of civil detention for crisis patients with psychiatric illnesses; the Amsterdam study of acute psychiatry VII

  • Louk F. M. van der Post
  • Jaap Peen
  • Jack J. M. Dekker
Original Paper



Given raised numbers of civil detentions in the Netherlands and other European countries, it is important to assess the patient risk profile with respect to the incidence of those far-reaching treatment decisions. The aim of the ASAP study is to develop a comprehensive prediction model that considers all possible patient-related predictors known from earlier research.


We took a random sample of 252 from the 2,682 patients coming into contact with two psychiatric emergency teams in Amsterdam between September 2004 and September 2006. We recorded socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, aspects of social support and psychiatric history. We interviewed the patients using the Verona Service Satisfaction Scale (Verona-EU) and the Birchwood Insight Scale. During a two-year follow-up period we noted their use of mental health care facilities.


Stepwise logistic regression analyses with resulted in a final prediction model (P ≤ 0.001) including preceding involuntary admission (OR 9.4, 95 % CI 3.6–24.7, P ≤ 0.001), domestic situation alone (OR 4.5, 95 % CI 1.9–11.0, P = 0.001) and VSSS score satisfactory (OR 0.2, 95 % CI 0.0–0.8, P = 0.030) as predictors of civil detention during 2 years of follow-up.


With the presented prediction model it will be possible to identify patients at a high risk of civil detention: patients with a history of previous involuntary admissions who live alone and are not satisfied with the mental health care they got before. This suggests the possibility that timely preventive measures can be taken comprising the adjustment or intensification of the treatment plan for this specific group of patients.


Community mental health care Psychiatric emergency Civil detention Prediction model Follow-up study 



The authors wish to thank ARKIN Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, for financial support. The study was also supported by a grant from the Foundation for Support VCVGZ, Arnhem, Netherlands. The authors also wish to thank the patients taking part in the study and also the participating psychiatric clinicians from the Psychiatric Emergency Service Amsterdam and from the Acute Treatment Unit.

Conflict of interest

The authors report no competing interests.


  1. 1.
    Mulder CL, Broer J, Uitenbroek D, van Marle P, van AM Hemert, Wierdsma AI (2006) Accelerated increase in the number of involuntary admissions following the implementation of the Dutch act on compulsory admission to psychiatric hospitals (BOPZ). Ned Tijdschr Geneesk 150(6):319–322Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Stefano A, Ducci G (2008) Involuntary admission and compulsory treatment in Europe. Int J Ment Health 37(3):10–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nijs H, Vandenberghe J (2008) Gedwongen psychiatrische opname ontwikkelingen in Vlaanderen [Civil commitment of mentally ill patients: developments in Flanders]. Tijdschrift voor Psychiatrie 50:55–60Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    van der Post LFM (2012) IBS admission as an outcome; Factors predicting the probability of patients qualifying for compulsory emergency admission Vrije Universiteit AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    van der Post LF, Peen J, Visch I, Mulder CL, Beekman AJ, Dekker JJM (2013) Patient’s perspectives and the risk of compulsory (re-) admission; The Amsterdam Study of Acute Psychiatry V. Int J Soc Psychiatry 1–9. doi: 10.1177/0020764012470234
  6. 6.
    van der Post L, Visch I, Mulder CL, Schoevers RA, Dekker J, Beekman AJ (2011) Is a higher risk of compulsory admission for immigrants related to different pathways to psychiatric care? A report from the Amsterdam Study of Acute Psychiatry (ASAP I). Int J Soc Psychiatr 2011 May 31. (Online First 31 May 2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    van der Post PL, Visch I, Mulder C, Schoevers R, Dekker J, Beekman A (2012) Factors associated with higher risks of emergency compulsory admission for immigrants: a report from the ASAP study. Int J Soc Psychiatry 58(4):374–380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Priebe S, Katsakou C, Yeeles K, Amos T, Morriss R, Wang D et al (2010) Predictors of clinical and social outcomes following involuntary hospital admission: a prospective observational study. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 261(5):377–386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Faccincani C, Mignolli G, Platt S (1990) Service utilisation, social support and psychiatric status in a cohort of patients with schizophrenic psychoses. A 7 year follow-up study. Schizophr Res 3(2):139–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aberg-Wistedt A, Cressell T, Lidberg Y, Liljenberg B, Osby U (1995) Two-year outcome of team-based intensive case management for patients with schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv 46(12):1263–1266PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Becker T, Thornicroft G, Leese M, McCrone P, Johnson S, Albert M et al (1997) Social networks and service use among representative cases of psychosis in south London. Br J Psychiatry 171:15–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van der Post LFM, Mulder CL, Visch I, Peen J, Dekker JJM, Beekman AT (2012) Social support and the risk of compulsory (re-)admission: the amsterdam study of acute psychiatry IV. Psychiatr Serv 63(6):577–583PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Drake RJ, Dunn G, Tarrier N, Bentall RP, Haddock G, Lewis SW (2007) Insight as a predictor of the outcome of first-episode nonaffective psychosis in a prospective cohort study in England. J Clin Psychiatry 68(1):81–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Spoedeisende Psychiatrie Amsterdam. (2008) Jaarverslag 2007Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sonderen Ev. (1991) Het meten van sociale steun Rijksuniversiteit van GroningenGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ruehlman L, Lanyon RI, Karoly P (1999) Development and validation of the multidimensional health profile part I: psychosocial functioning. Psychol Assess 11(2):166–176PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Birchwood M, Smith J, Drury V, Healy J, Macmillan F, Slade M (1994) A self-report Insight Scale for psychosis: reliability, validity and sensitivity to change. Acta Psychiatr Scand 89(1):62–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ruggeri M, Lasalvia A, Dall’Agnola R, van Wijngaarden B, Knudsen HC, Leese M et al (2000) Development, internal consistency and reliability of the Verona Service Satisfaction Scale–European Version. EPSILON Study 7. European Psychiatric Services: inputs linked to outcome domains and needs. Br J Psychiatry Suppl 39:s41–s48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ruggeri M, Salvi G, Perwanger V, Phelan M, Pellegrini N, Parabiaghi A (2006) Satisfaction with community and hospital-based emergency services amongst severely mentally ill service users : a comparison study in South-Verona and South-London. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 41(4):302–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ruggeri M, Lasalvia A (2000) Verona Service Satisfaction Scale European Version (VSSS-EU); manual. Dipartimento di Medicina e Sanitá Pubblica sezione di Psychiatria; Universitá degli studi di Verona (Italy) and World Health Organization, Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental HealthGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dekker J, Theunissen J, Van R, Kikkert M, van der PL, Zoeteman J et al (2012) Are long-term psychiatric patients causing more crisis consultations outside office hours in mental health care? Int J Soc Psychiatry (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Katsakou C, Priebe S (2007) Patient’s experiences of involuntary hospital admission and treatment: a review of qualitative studies. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc 16(2):172–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Katsakou C, Bowers L, Amos T, Morriss R, Rose D, Wykes T et al (2010) Coercion and treatment satisfaction among involuntary patients. Psychiatr Serv 61(3):286–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Katsakou C, Rose D, Amos T, Bowers L, McCabe R, Oliver D et al (2012) Psychiatric patients’ views on why their involuntary hospitalisation was right or wrong: a qualitative study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 47(7):1169–1179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Priebe S, Katsakou C, Amos T, Leese M, Morriss R, Rose D et al (2009) Patients’ views and readmissions 1 year after involuntary hospitalisation. Br J Psychiatry 194(1):49–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Priebe S, Katsakou C, Glockner M, Dembinskas A, Fiorillo A, Karastergiou A et al (2010) Patients’ views of involuntary hospital admission after 1 and 3 months: prospective study in 11 European countries. Br J Psychiatry 196(3):179–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kallert TW, Glockner M, Onchev G, Raboch J, Karastergiou A, Solomon Z et al (2005) The EUNOMIA project on coercion in psychiatry: study design and preliminary data. World Psychiatry 4(3):168–172PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lay B, Salize HJ, Dressing H, Rusch N, Schonenberger T, Buhlmann M et al (2012) Preventing compulsory admission to psychiatric inpatient care through psycho-education and crisis focused monitoring. BMC Psychiatry 12:136PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lay B, Nordt C, Rossler W (2011) Variation in use of coercive measures in psychiatric hospitals. Eur Psychiatry 26(4):244–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Webber M, Huxley P (2004) Social exclusion and risk of emergency compulsory admission. A case-control study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 39(12):1000–1009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mulder CL, Koopmans GT, Selten JP (2006) Emergency psychiatry, compulsory admissions and clinical presentation among immigrants to the Netherlands. Br J Psychiatry 188:386–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    de Wit MA, Tuinebreijer WC, van Brussel GH, Selten JP (2012) Ethnic differences in risk of acute compulsory admission in Amsterdam, 1996–2005. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 47(1):111–118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Louk F. M. van der Post
    • 1
  • Jaap Peen
    • 1
  • Jack J. M. Dekker
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ResearchARKIN Mental Health CareAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and PedagogyVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations