There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Background
The aim of this work is to evaluate whether patients affected by severe eating disorders
(ED) should be submitted to coercive treatment or not.
Methods
Relevant international studies, identified by means of a medline-search, were examined,
reviewed and integrated with our experience in Palazzo Francisci. APA guidelines and
international legislation were consulted too.
Results
Among the DSM-IV-disorders, ED show the highest mortality rate after drug addictions.
The mortality rate is even higher for anorexia nervosa because the frequent refusal
of treatment delays diagnosis and treatment and influences prognosis. The American
guidelines for ED treatment (2000) tackle the problem in two or three passages "Legal
interventions, including involuntary hospitalization and legal guardianship, may be
necessary to ensure the safety of treatment of reluctant patients whose general medical
conditions are life-threatening"; "On these rare occasions staff have to take over
the responsibilities for providing life-preserving care. Naso-gastric feedings are
preferable to intravenous feedings...total parenteral feeding is required only very
rarely and in life-threatening situations"; "In situations where involuntary forced
feeding is considered, careful thought should be given to clinical circumstances,
family opinion, and relevant legal and ethical dimensions of the patient's treatment".
In Italian legislation, compulsory medical treatment is specified for mental illnesses
but there are no specific indications. Phenomena such as anorexia nervosa do not have
their own position in the legislation.
Conclusion
The bibliographic review showed that there are no agreed guidelines on the use of
compulsory medical treatment. In our experience too, CBT-type interventions in patients
without severe psychiatric co-morbidities appear to drastically reduce or even eliminate
any recourse to such an extreme measure seen as aggressive, intrusive and linked to
a lack of value of the patients.