Page 134 - Reduction of coercive measures

Chapter 6
and consequently in a sense arbitrary. The third limitation concerns the long-term nature of the collection of information. The constructs assessed with questionnaires could vary over time. And fourth, because of the cross sectional design of the study no conclusion can be drawn on the causality of the associations.
Finally, the effect of the intervention on the reduction of coercive measures was demonstrated in a large care organization in Chapter five. Several limitations should be taken into account when interpreting the effects. It is unclear whether the effect is specific to this organization or can be generalized to other care organizations. One other limitation concerns the lack of insight into how much support and coordination is needed for the implementation of the program. Running the multidisciplinary team required coordination which was not initially included in the development of the program. Findings may therefore also be the result of this coordination and control, and not merely the result of the multicomponent approach. Another limitation refers to the data on coercive measures. These data did not provide information on the duration and frequency of the application. It is possible that changes in the application related to duration or frequency. These nuanced effects are not identified. Finally, the broad definition of coercive measures can lead to different interpretations of forms of measures. Despite close involvement of the expert team in registering coercive measures, this may still have affected the registration.
132