Psychological Outcomes Associated with Hospitalization and Incarceration: A Systematic Review of Shared and Setting-Specific Factors

Background: Hospitalization and incarceration are distinct institutional experiences, but both may involve reduced autonomy, externally regulated routines, uncertainty, restricted privacy, and disruption of meaningful social relationships. This systematic review examined shared and setting-specific psychological outcomes and associated factors across the two environments. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to 30 January 2026. Of 1149 identified records, 22 studies met the eligibility criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool 2018, and findings were synthesized narratively because substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Results: Ten studies examined incarcerated populations and twelve examined hospitalized populations. Across incarceration studies, reported estimates ranged from 14.9% to 72.6% for depressive symptoms or mood disorders and from 23.3% to 77.8% for anxiety symptoms or disorders. Across hospitalization studies, corresponding estimates ranged from 5.1% to 41.0% and from 5.8% to 60.0%, respectively. These ranges reflect heterogeneous screening instruments, diagnostic procedures, populations, and outcome definitions and were not statistically pooled. In both settings, poorer psychological outcomes were associated with reduced perceived control, disrupted routines, uncertainty, limited social support, and individual vulnerability. Setting-specific factors included prison climate, coping style, shame, and sentence-related circumstances in incarceration, and illness severity, functional impairment, prognostic uncertainty, isolation precautions, and prolonged or repeated admission in hospitalization. Findings concerning exposure duration were inconsistent in both settings. Conclusions: Hospitalization and incarceration should not be regarded as psychologically equivalent. Nevertheless, they may share experiential conditions associated with distress, particularly when autonomy, privacy, predictability, and social connectedness are reduced. Because the evidence was heterogeneous and predominantly observational, causal conclusions and direct quantitative comparisons cannot be made.