Using consentless practices on medical wards—A qualitative study

Background In contrast to legally mandated coercive care in psychiatry, there is a paucity of studies on the use of coercive practices within somatic healthcare. Aim To gain an in-depth understanding of the practices used by nurses and other staff to provide somatic healthcare interventions to ill patients in the absence of informed consent. Research design Focus-group interviews were held, and the collected data were analyzed qualitatively using Reflexive Thematic Analysis. Participants and research context Participants ( n = 37, mainly nurses) from medical wards at two Swedish hospitals. Ethical considerations All participants were informed about the study’s aims and voluntary nature, and provided oral consent before being interviewed. No sensitive personal information was recorded. Findings The qualitative analysis resulted in the identification of four main themes: Consentless practices are used all the time ; “Good examples” of consentless practices are learned on the ward ; Choosing and adopting consentless practices to suit the situation ; and Professional experience influences the use of consentless practices . Conclusions Consentless practices are frequently used on medical wards, and nurses and other staff are familiar with a wide array of such practices. Consentless practices are learned informally, mainly through observation. Staff with greater professional experience can deliver healthcare interventions without overt coercion, but may become habituated to using consentless practices. These findings raise a range of ethical concerns. Better opportunities for reflection and learning on this topic may improve the ethical climate on medical wards.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nursing Ethics
Published
2026-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330261459829
Primary Topic
Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Using consentless practices on medical wards—A qualitative study

Joar Björk, Niklas Juth, Tove Godskesen
Nursing Ethics
Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
article

Using consentless practices on medical wards—A qualitative study

Joar Björk, Niklas Juth, Tove Godskesen
article en

Abstract

Background In contrast to legally mandated coercive care in psychiatry, there is a paucity of studies on the use of coercive practices within somatic healthcare. Aim To gain an in-depth understanding of the practices used by nurses and other staff to provide somatic healthcare interventions to ill patients in the absence of informed consent. Research design Focus-group interviews were held, and the collected data were analyzed qualitatively using Reflexive Thematic Analysis. Participants and research context Participants ( n = 37, mainly nurses) from medical wards at two Swedish hospitals. Ethical considerations All participants were informed about the study’s aims and voluntary nature, and provided oral consent before being interviewed. No sensitive personal information was recorded. Findings The qualitative analysis resulted in the identification of four main themes: Consentless practices are used all the time ; “Good examples” of consentless practices are learned on the ward ; Choosing and adopting consentless practices to suit the situation ; and Professional experience influences the use of consentless practices . Conclusions Consentless practices are frequently used on medical wards, and nurses and other staff are familiar with a wide array of such practices. Consentless practices are learned informally, mainly through observation. Staff with greater professional experience can deliver healthcare interventions without overt coercion, but may become habituated to using consentless practices. These findings raise a range of ethical concerns. Better opportunities for reflection and learning on this topic may improve the ethical climate on medical wards.

Nursing Ethics
Uppsala University (SE)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.