Use of restrictive practices in approved mental health centres in Ireland: consideration of five years of national data.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rates of use of restrictive practices (RPs), such as seclusion and physical restraint, in approved mental health centres (ACs) in Ireland. METHODS: Examination of data reported to the regulator of mental health in Ireland, the Mental Health Commission (MHC), and the Health Research Board (HRB). RESULTS: There has been a substantial reduction in RP use in Irish ACs between 2018 and 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The MHC welcomes this reduction in RP use and considers several possible reasons for this data.

Variations in definitions used for describing restrictive care practices (seclusion and restraint) in adult mental health inpatient units: a systematic review and content analysis.

PURPOSE: The main purpose of this review was to (1) identify thematic elements within definitions used by recently published literature to describe the constructs of physical/mechanical restraint, seclusion and chemical restraint in adult mental health inpatient units. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search of six databases (Scopus, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Embase, and CINAHL-Plus). In this review, we conducted content analysis to synthesize evidence to understand and compare the commonalities and discrepancies in conceptual elements that were incorporated within the definitions of different forms of restrictive care practices. RESULTS: A total of 95 studies that provided definitions for different forms of restrictive care practices [physical/mechanical restraint (n = 72), seclusion (n = 65) and chemical restraint (n = 19)] were included in this review. Significant variations existed in the conceptual domains presented within the applied definitions of physical/mechanical restraint, seclusion, and chemical restraint. Conceptual themes identified in this review were methods of restrictive care practice, reasons and desired outcomes, the extent of patient restriction during restrictive care practice episodes, timing (duration, frequency, and time of the day), the level of patient autonomy, and the personnel implementing these practices. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistencies in the terminologies and conceptual boundaries used to describe the constructs of different forms of restrictive care practices underscore the need to move forward in endorsing consensus definitions that reflect the diverse perspectives, ensuring clarity and consistency in practice and research. This will assist in validly measuring and comparing the actual trends of restrictive care practice use across different healthcare institutions and jurisdictions.

Evaluating the effectiveness of the Complex Behaviour Forum-A multisystem approach to supporting people with complex challenging behaviour.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the effectiveness of a cross-departmental case review panel-the Multicap Complex Behaviour Forum (CBF)-in reducing challenging behaviour exhibited by people with intellectual disabilities. METHODS: Thirty participants (15 CBF participants and 15 matched-control participants) took part in the study. Behavioural data was collected for each CBF participant (and their matched control) for the three-month period before entering the CBF, during their time in the CBF, and the 3 months after exiting the CBF. RESULTS: There was a significant interaction of group and time observed, with the CBF participants showing more change in behavioural incidents across time. Associated with this change was a noticeable reduction in staff injury costs related to the challenging behaviour of the CBF participants. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that positive behavioural and organisational outcomes are enhanced by fostering collaboration across multiple organisational systems when it comes to supporting people who exhibit challenging behaviours.

Does ending night-confinement reduce use of seclusion and prevalence of violence in a forensic psychiatric hospital? A retrospective observational study.

Forensic psychiatry services strive to reduce the use of restrictive practices, and balance its occasionally necessary use with the creation of a therapeutic environment. There is limited research into the effects of least restrictive practice in forensic settings. The present retrospective observational study reviews the incidents of seclusion, restraint, and violence in a forensic psychiatric hospital one year before and one year after the introduction of a policy which ended night-confinement and allowed patients to exit their rooms overnight. The results show that there were fewer episodes of seclusion and fewer hours spent in seclusion post policy change, however this difference was not significant. There was no statistically significant difference in incidents of violence or in the use of physical restraint. While the research is of a small scale, it does suggest that policies ending night-confinement do not lead to increased seclusion episodes and encourages future research in this area.

"My life isn't my life, it's the systems": A qualitative exploration of women's experiences of day-to-day restrictive practices as inpatients.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Sometimes someone needs to be in hospital because they are struggling with their mental health and need some extra support but being in hospital can also be a difficult experience. There are a lot of restrictions in place in hospital, like locked doors, rules to follow and not much choice about what happens to you. Other research has found that these restrictions can feel difficult and stressful for people and so more research is needed about this. We wanted to know what being in hospital felt like for women in particular. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: We interviewed women who were in hospital because of their mental health about what it was like for them in hospital. The women told us that they felt powerless while they were in hospital. They sometimes felt like they were being punished and this could affect their mood and could lead to them hurting themselves. They also said that they were not always listened to by staff, and they found it difficult being away from their family and friends while they were in hospital. The women also told us that being in hospital could sometimes help them to feel safe. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Women should be looked after in hospital in a way that helps them to feel in control of what happens to them. They should be supported to be able to go outside the hospital on leave, to keep in touch with their family and friends, and they should be listened to by staff. A project called "safewards" has suggested some ways for helping to make hospital wards safer. They have suggested that everyone should be clear about what the rules are when they go into hospital and ways that staff could communicate more clearly with the people they are working with. Our research supports using these techniques. ABSTRACT: Introduction Inpatient care often involves restrictive interventions such as seclusion and restraint and restrictive practices that limit the person's freedom, rights and daily activities. Restrictive practice has not been the explicit focus in previous research; however, it often appears as an important theme, with participants identifying it can have a detrimental effect on their well-being. More research specifically on this topic in an inpatient setting is, therefore, needed. Women might be particularly vulnerable to adverse effects of restrictive practices compared to men as women generally occupy less powerful positions in society and more often experience abuse. Aims The study aimed to explore women's experiences of routine restrictive practices in mental health inpatient settings. Methods Twenty-two women who were currently inpatients on mental health wards were interviewed about their experiences of restrictive practices in hospital. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Results An overarching theme emerged of powerlessness. Four key sub-themes were also identified: restrictions perceived as punitive, having no voice, impact of restrictions on relationships and restrictions providing safety and support. Discussion Although restrictive practices were found to provide the women with a sense of safety, they were also found to impact upon the women's well-being, leading to increases in self-harm and over-reliance on restrictions. Implications for practice This research highlights the importance of gender-informed inpatient services for women that foster independence, empowerment and allow women to have their voices heard. Safewards interventions such as clear mutual expectations and soft words could contribute to mitigating the impact of restrictive practices.

PROD-ALERT: Psychiatric restraint open data-analysis using logarithmic estimates on reporting trends.

Aims and Methods: Restraint reporting varies, which undermines regulation, obfuscates analyses, and incentivises minimisation. The English Mental Health Units Use of Force Act 2018, "Seni's Law" mandates reporting. This paper analysed open data from all psychiatric and learning disability institutions in England from September 2020 to August 2021. We correlated logarithms of "people restrained per month", against "bed days" per month and "people under legal mental health detention" per month, per institution. We designated institutions reporting some restraint for at least 11 of 12 months as reporting "completely" and used their trend to infer rates from non-"complete" institutions. Allowance was made for size. Our a priori manual can be shared on request. Results: Logarithms of people restrained per month and bed-days per month correlated among complete reporters: R2 0.90 (2.s.f). Persons detained per month also correlated with restraint: R2 0.78. "Partial" institutions reported intermittently. "Joiner" institutions reported firstly null, then substantive reporting. "Null" institutions (including the largest) reported no restraint. Precisely-reporting institutions with high inverse variance between months reported similar restraint-rates but less-precise reported lower rates. In institutions reporting no restraint, two independent "true rate" estimations, by bed-days or people detained, correlated across institutions: R2 0.95. Inference from size suggested non-complete reporters restrained 1,774 people in England per month 95% CI (1,449-2,174). Clinical implications: Restraint remains under-reported. Institutional size explains most restraint variation among complete reporting institutions, 90% of R2. Institutional restraint reports can be compared per-bed per-month. Rates of people detained are a useful independent "checking" comparator in England.

Exploring factors that influence success when introducing "The Safewards Model" to an acute adolescent ward: A qualitative study of staff perceptions.

PROBLEM: The Safewards' model identifies factors that can lead to conflict and addresses these factors, using ten interventions, within inpatient mental health wards aiming to reduce "conflict and containment." The Department of Health (2014) and Care Quality Commission (2017) supported the use of Safewards to reduce restrictive practice across all mental health settings in the UK, but its application to adolescent mental health remains relatively unexplored. This study therefore aims to address the research question: "What are the factors influencing the success of ten Safewards' interventions when implemented onto an acute adolescent ward?" METHODS: Eight healthcare assistants and two nurses who had attended Safewards' training participated in semi-structured interviews four months after Safewards was introduced to an acute adolescent ward. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis. Data analysis was conducted inductively by developing data-driven themes. FINDINGS: Many of the factors influencing Safewards' success in adolescent mental health (e.g., acuity; dependence on nonregular staffing; lack of leadership and operating procedures) paralleled the evidence found in adult services. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes new information by implementing "mutual help" and "calm down" principles with adolescents, as well as discussing barriers of operational procedures and benefits of patient involvement.

Management of Behaviours in Dementia: Treatment or Restraint?

The use of antipsychotic medication in the management of behaviours of concern in dementia is complex. Antipsychotics may be part of medical treatment or be a restrictive practice. The uncertainty around consent for restrictive practices exposes patients to the risk of antipsychotic use without consent and doctors to the risk of liability. This situation is even less clear in Victoria following the ruling in HYY [2022] VCAT 97. This article examines the process of consent, the potential liabilities and possible defences. It concludes that changes are needed to the process for obtaining consent to use antipsychotic medications for restrictive practices, especially in Victoria.

Defensive practices in mental health nursing: Professionalism and poignant tensions.

Mental health nursing is a skilled profession, well positioned to support patients towards recovery with evidence-based therapeutic interventions. However, the profession continues to be challenged by tensions surrounding the delivery of restrictive interventions and concerns over tendencies towards defensive practices. This paper examines the ambiguity this creates within the mental health nursing role. Organizational cultures that overvalue metrics and administrative tasks create barriers for therapeutic engagement while contributing to role confusion and stress within nursing. We need to address such structural constraints on nurses as mental health nurses' well-being is crucial to service delivery and the realization of therapeutic goals. From the UK perspective, authors argue that there is a need to examine service structures that foster compassionate and transformational leadership to enable mental health nurses to exercise the agency to practice therapeutically. Education and quality nursing research have a pivotal role to play in enabling this shift.

Risk factors associated with use of coercive practices in adult mental health inpatients: A systematic review.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Coercive practices such as restraint (physically holding a person) or seclusion (containing a person in locked room) are frequently used in mental health care. How often and which specific practices are used is not consistent across different healthcare systems, hospitals or wards. Internationally, there is agreement on the need to monitor and reduce the use of coercive practices. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The reviewed evidence suggests a number of different factors affect a person's risk of experiencing coercive practices, while admitted to a mental health ward. However, there is currently not enough high-quality research evidence to say which factors are most important or how they work to influence the likelihood of a person experiencing coercive practice. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: When carrying out risk assessments, mental health professionals must take into account that a number of different factors are important and explore these with the patient. Care plans aimed at minimizing the use of coercive practices, such as restraint, must be personalized and developed with the individual. ABSTRACT: Introduction Coercive practices, such as physical restraint and seclusion, are a common feature of all mental healthcare systems. However, there is considerable variation in their use, concern about their iatrogenic potential and agreement internationally on the need to monitor and reduce their use. Aims To examine the evidence concerning risk factors associated with use of coercive practices in adults admitted to inpatient psychiatric services. Method A systematic review, consistent with PRIMSA guidelines, of four databases (PsychINFO, Medline, CINHAL and Embase). Peer-reviewed, English language articles from database inception to February 2020 were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Results Twenty studies met inclusion criteria. Risk factors examined in the studies organized around four categories: patient socio-demographic; patient clinical; staff; and organizational factors. Overall, methodological quality of papers was deemed weak, and there was insufficient evidence to support any singular risk factor. Discussion The reviewed evidence suggests risk of coercive practice in inpatient mental health settings is multifactorial. Further research to standardize concept definitions and elucidate the mechanisms behind variance in use is required. Implications for Practice Assessment of patients at risk of coercive practice must take a multifactorial approach.

Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Restraint Use in Aged Care.

Restraint use in Australian residential aged care has been highlighted by the media, and investigated by researchers, government and advocacy bodies. In 2018, the Royal Commission into Aged Care selected 'Restraint' as a key focus of inquiry. Subsequently, Federal legislation was passed to ensure restraint is only used in residential aged care services as the 'last resort'. To inform and develop Government educational resources, we conducted qualitative research to gain greater understanding of the experiences and attitudes of aged care stakeholders around restraint practice. Semi-structured interviews were held with 28 participants, comprising nurses, care staff, physicians, physiotherapists, pharmacists and relatives. Two focus groups were also conducted to ascertain the views of residential and community aged care senior management staff. Data were thematically analyzed using a pragmatic approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Five themes were identified during the study: 1. Understanding of restraint; 2. Support for legislation; 3. Restraint-free environments are not possible; 4. Low-level restraint; 5. Restraint in the community is uncharted. Although most staff, health practitioners and relatives have a basic understanding of restraint, more education is needed at a conceptual level to enable them to identify and avoid restraint practice, particularly 'low-level' forms and chemical restraint. There was strong support for the new restraint regulations, but most interviewees admitted they were unsure what the legislation entailed. With regards to resources, stakeholders wanted recognition that there were times when restraint was necessary and advice on what to do in these situations, as opposed to unrealistic aspirations for restraint-free care. Stakeholders reported greater oversight of restraint in residential aged care but specified that community restraint use was largely unknown. Research is needed to investigate the extent and types of restraint practice in community aged care.

Applying the CRPD to People With Intellectual and Developmental Disability With Behaviors of Concern During COVID-19.

People with intellectual and developmental disability (IDD) are a vulnerable population in all aspects of access and participation, abuse and neglect, and being subject to the use of restrictive practices. Accordingly, they are a group whose human rights can be impacted where equal access to supports, services, and accessible information is compromised. The current COVID-19 pandemic is a global humanitarian emergency that has had a devastating impact across the world, for all people. Growing concern has been raised about the impact of the COVID-19 virus on the health of people with disabilities and there has been subsequent development of strategies and protocols to promote equal access to information, health supports, and services. People with IDD have high levels of underlying comorbidity that increases their risk of contracting COVID-19 and measures to protect them from infection are critically important. However, those measures may trigger behaviors of concern and increase the risk of being subjected to restrictive practices. While some attention has been paid to the health impacts of COVID-19 on people with disabilities, there has been less paid to the impact on the human rights of people with IDD who present with behaviors of concern. The aim of this paper is to provide a hypothetical exploration of the impacts of pandemic prevention measures on people with IDD and behaviors of concern in the context of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). In the absence of available guidance for working with people with IDD with behaviors of concern during COVID-19, we suggest behavior support response plans that aim to ensure that people with IDD with behaviors of concern are supported properly in a time of significant disruption for them, thereby safeguarding their human rights.

Reducing restrictive practice: a pertinent issue for children's services.

The reduction of restrictive practice has gained momentum in mental health services and it is now becoming evident in mainstream adult services. There remains confusion as to the definition of 'restrictive practices' across all sectors of health care, including the difference between 'restrictive practices' (such as attitudes of control, limit setting and unnecessary ward rules) and 'restrictive interventions' (including physical, chemical or mechanical restraint). This article highlights the relevance of restrictive practice to children's nursing and argues that the principles apply across all health provision. Acts of restrictive practice may result in challenging behaviour, or even restrictive interventions, strategies to minimise both restrictive practice and subsequent acts of challenging behaviour are explored. Behavioural support plans adopting a bio-psycho-pharmaco-social approach have been shown to be effective in both mental health and adult nursing and are recommended for use in children's nursing.

Use of coercion prevention tools in Finnish psychiatric wards.

Inpatient violence is a widespread problem in psychiatric wards and has often serious consequences. Literature indicates that de-escalation techniques are the recommended first-line intervention for managing violence, are widely used to reduce it, and restrictive practices in mental health settings. However, these techniques and models are not used at the optimum frequency and/or important factors are limiting their use and effectiveness. We aimed to determine what kind of de-escalation methods are used to reduce violence and coercion in Finnish psychiatric hospitals. Descriptive qualitative research using semi-structured questionnaires and Framework Analysis was used. The results of the study are reported in quantitative terms. A survey of psychiatric wards (N = 65) in Finland's hospital districts (n = 16) was conducted in the Autumn of 2019 to find out which de-escalation models are used. Finnish psychiatric wards use both the Safewards and Six Core Strategies models to reduce violence and the use of restrictive practices. Half of the hospitals used interventions and strategies from both models. Violence preventive methods are widely used in mental health settings in Finland. These interventions and models cover the organization, leadership, and patient perspectives to improve safety and decrease coercion actions in psychiatric wards.

People who experience seclusion in adult mental health inpatient services: An examination of health of the nation outcome scales scores.

The Health of the Nation Outcomes Scales (HoNOS) provides an overview of a person's behaviour, impairment, clinical symptoms, and social functioning. This study investigated the profile of people who had been secluded in New Zealand's adult mental health inpatient services using 12 individual HoNOS ratings. Routinely collected clinical data were extracted from the Programme for the Integration of Mental Health Data (PRIMHD). This is the national data set for mental health and addiction services. A logistic regression model was fitted to the data which adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, bed nights, compulsory treatment, and district health board. After adjustment, three HoNOS items significantly predicted the risk of seclusion: overactive, aggressive, disruptive, or agitated behaviour (adjusted OR = 4.82, 95% CI [3.88, 5.97], P < 0.001); problem drinking or drug-taking (adjusted OR = 1.51, 95% CI [1.25, 1.82], P < 0.001); and problems with hallucinations and delusions (adjusted OR = 1.33, 95% CI [1.09, 1.63], P = 0.006). In addition, two HoNOS items were protective for seclusion: nonaccidental self-injury (adjusted OR = 0.65, 95% CI [0.51, 0.83], P < 0.001) and depressed mood (adjusted OR = 0.58, 95% CI [0.47, 0.72], P < 0.001). Thus, responding effectively to agitation and/or aggression, substance use, and psychosis plays an important role in reducing the use of seclusion. Mental health nurses and other workers can reduce seclusion through early assessment, effective communication, de-escalation techniques, reduction tools, trauma-informed care, and consulting with consumers and whanau.

Variation in seclusion rates across New Zealand's specialist mental health services: Are sociodemographic and clinical factors influencing this?

Rates of seclusion vary across New Zealand's publicly funded district health board (DHB) adult mental health inpatient services as indicated by national data. Anecdotally, this variation has been attributed to a range of factors directly relating to the people admitted to acute inpatient services. This study examined the extent to which variation in seclusion rates could be explained by the sociodemographic and clinical differences between populations admitted into adult mental health inpatient services. Retrospective data were obtained from the Programme for the Integration of Mental Health Data (PRIMHD). A logistic regression model was fitted to these data, with seclusion (yes/no) as the dependent variable and DHB groups as the independent variable. The DHBs were classified into four groups based on their seclusion rates. The model adjusted for ethnicity, age, number of bed nights, total Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) scores, and compulsory treatment status. Odds ratios remained virtually unchanged after adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical factors. People admitted to DHB Group 4 (highest secluding DHBs) were 11 times more likely to be secluded than people in Group 1 (lowest secluding DHBs), adjusted OR = 11.1, 95% CI [7.5,16.4], P < 0.001. Results indicate DHB variation in seclusion rates cannot be attributed to the sociodemographic and clinical factors of people admitted into DHB adult mental health inpatient services. Instead, this variation may be explained by differences in service delivery models and practice approaches. A model of system improvements aimed at reducing seclusion is discussed.

Reducing restrictive practice in adult services: not only an issue for mental health professionals.

Reducing 'restrictive practices' is an issue of national importance, pertinent to all NHS sectors, yet there is poor awareness of the issue in mainstream adult services. Such practices potentially restrict a person's rights to choice, self-determination, privacy and freedom. Challenging behaviour is often the result of unmet needs, communication difficulties or diagnostic overshadowing, but there is a common misconception that patients exhibit such behaviours because of their impaired intellectual abilities or mental health problems. This article seeks to raise awareness of restrictive practices and suggest the way forward. It highlights the importance of good de-escalation skills, which, if adopted early in therapeutic relationships, may help reduce the occurrence of challenging behaviours and situations. Behavioural support plans that adopt a biopsychopharmacosocial approach (BPPS) detail a range of interventions for managing challenging behaviours. Tailored support that follows a BPPS approach could reduce incidents of challenging behaviour, reduce costly observation, improve the patient experience and protect the patient's liberty.

The benefits of sensory modulation on levels of distress for consumers in a mental health emergency setting.

OBJECTIVES: This paper reports a pilot study exploring the benefits of offering sensory modulation within a mental health emergency setting for consumers experiencing distress during a psychiatric presentation. METHODS: Seventy-four consumers with a mental health presentation reported on their sensory modulation use experiences during their stay in a South Australian tertiary teaching hospital emergency department. An evaluation form was used to document use of items, self-reported distress pre and post sensory modulation use, and other consumer experiences. RESULTS: Consumers used between one and six sensory items for a median duration of 45 min. There was a statistically significant reduction ( t(73) = 15.83, p < .001) in self-reported distress post sensory modulation use, and consumers also reported that use was helpful, distracting, calming and assisted in managing negative emotions and thoughts. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate the potential value of sensory-based interventions in reducing behavioural and emotional dysregulation in an emergency setting whilst also promoting consumer self-management strategies.

Rapid tranquilization: An audit of Irish mental health nursing practice.

Rapid tranquillization is a pharmacological intervention sometimes employed in mental health care for the management of acute behavioural disturbance. It is a form of restrictive practice, which, along with seclusion and restraint, is a conventional and controversial intervention in the therapeutic management of risk in mental health settings. This study surveyed mental health nurses practice in rapid tranquillization. A self-report questionnaire was utilized which addressed aspects such as definitions of rapid tranquillization, presence of rapid tranquillization policy, types of incidents where it is used and postintervention monitoring. The results demonstrate that rapid tranquillization is an intervention used in the management of acute behavioural disturbance in various mental health settings in Ireland. Respondents showed a basic understanding of rapid tranquillization as an intervention; however, some areas reported not having a specific rapid tranquillization policy. There was some evidence of a variation in postrapid tranquillization monitoring of psychiatric/mental health and physical health. Service user debriefing following rapid tranquillization was reported to be common; however, the content of this was not elaborated on. In the light of variations in practice, specific training and the development of rapid tranquillization policies are recommended.