[Ethics of care: Assessment of the ethical issues in the protocols or consensuses on mechanical restraint in force in Spain]. / Ética de los cuidados: valoración de los contenidos éticos en los protocolos o consensos de contención mecánica vigentes en España.

INTRODUCTION: Mechanical restraints are widely used in health care practice, despite the numerous ethical conflicts they raise. The aim of this study is to evaluate the ethical considerations contemplated in the current protocols on mechanical restraint in Spain. METHOD: Systematic review in PubMed, WOS and Scopus, Google and Google Scholar. An ad hoc list of 30 items was used to evaluate the ethical content of the protocols. The quality of guidelines was assessed with AGREE II. RESULTS: The need for informed consent (IC) is reflected in 72% of the documents, the IC model sheet is included in only 41% of them, the rest of the analyzed characteristics on IC are fulfilled in percentages between 6% (the document includes the need to reevaluate the indication for IC) and 31% (the document contemplates to whom it should be requested). More than 20 ethical contents are reflected in 31% of them and less than 10 in 19% of the guidelines. The quality of the guides, according to AGREE II, ranged from 27 to 116 points (maximum possible 161), with a mean score of 68.7. Only 9% of the documents were classified as high quality. Finally, the correlation between ethical content and quality measured with AGREE II was 0.75. CONCLUSIONS: The variability of ethical contents in guidelines on mechanical restraints is very high. The ethical requirements to be included in protocols, consensus or Clinical Practice Guidelines should be defined.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Patient Restraint in Emergency Departments by Police Transport Status.

Importance: Black patients are more likely than White patients to be restrained during behavioral crises in emergency departments (EDs). Although the perils of policing mental health for Black individuals are recognized, it is unclear whether or to what extent police transport mediates the association between Black race and use of physical restraint in EDs. Objective: To evaluate the degree to which police transport mediates the association between Black race and use of physical restraint in EDs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, cross-sectional study used electronic health record data from ED visits by adults (aged ≥18 years) to 3 hospitals in the southeastern US and 10 in the northeastern US between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2022. Data were analyzed from September 1, 2022, to May 30, 2023. Exposures: Race, ethnicity, and police transport to the hospital. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome variable was the presence of an order for restraints during an ED visit. Results: A total of 4 263 437 ED visits by 1 257 339 patients (55.5% of visits by female and 44.5% by male patients; 26.1% by patients 65 years or older) were included in the study. Black patients accounted for 27.5% of visits; Hispanic patients, 17.6%; White patients, 50.3%; and other or unknown race or ethnicity, 4.6%. In models adjusted for age, sex, site, previous behavioral or psychiatric history, and visit diagnoses, Black patients were at increased odds of experiencing restraint compared with White patients (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.33 [95% CI, 1.28-1.37]). Within the mediation analysis, Black patients had higher odds of being brought to the hospital by police compared with all other patients (AOR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.34-1.42]). Patients brought to the ED under police transport had increased odds of experiencing restraint compared with all other modes of transport (AOR, 5.51 [95% CI, 5.21-5.82]). The estimated proportion of use of restraints for Black patients mediated by police transport was 10.70% (95% CI, 9.26%-12.53%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of ED visits across 13 hospitals, police transport may have mediated the association between Black race and use of physical restraint. These findings suggest a need to further explore the mechanisms by which transport to emergency care may influence disparate restrictive interventions for patients experiencing behavioral emergencies.

Development and evaluation of a de-escalation training intervention in adult acute and forensic units: the EDITION systematic review and feasibility trial.

Background: Containment (e.g. physical restraint and seclusion) is used frequently in mental health inpatient settings. Containment is associated with serious psychological and physical harms. De-escalation (psychosocial techniques to manage distress without containment) is recommended to manage aggression and other unsafe behaviours, for example self-harm. All National Health Service staff are trained in de-escalation but there is little to no evidence supporting training's effectiveness. Objectives: Objectives were to: (1) qualitatively investigate de-escalation and identify barriers and facilitators to use across the range of adult acute and forensic mental health inpatient settings; (2) co-produce with relevant stakeholders an intervention to enhance de-escalation across these settings; (3) evaluate the intervention's preliminary effect on rates of conflict (e.g. violence, self-harm) and containment (e.g. seclusion and physical restraint) and understand barriers and facilitators to intervention effects. Design: Intervention development informed by Experience-based Co-design and uncontrolled pre and post feasibility evaluation. Systematic reviews and qualitative interviews investigated contextual variation in use and effects of de-escalation. Synthesis of this evidence informed co-design of an intervention to enhance de-escalation. An uncontrolled feasibility trial of the intervention followed. Clinical outcome data were collected over 24 weeks including an 8-week pre-intervention phase, an 8-week embedding and an 8-week post-intervention phase. Setting: Ten inpatient wards (including acute, psychiatric intensive care, low, medium and high secure forensic) in two United Kingdom mental health trusts. Participants: In-patients, clinical staff, managers, carers/relatives and training staff in the target settings. Interventions: Enhancing de-escalation techniques in adult acute and forensic units: Development and evaluation of an evidence-based training intervention (EDITION) interventions included de-escalation training, two novel models of reflective practice, post-incident debriefing and feedback on clinical practice, collaborative prescribing and ward rounds, practice changes around admission, shift handovers and the social and physical environment, and sensory modulation and support planning to reduce patient distress. Main outcome measures: Outcomes measured related to feasibility (recruitment and retention, completion of outcome measures), training outcomes and clinical and safety outcomes. Conflict and containment rates were measured via the Patient-Staff Conflict Checklist. Clinical outcomes were measured using the Attitudes to Containment Measures Questionnaire, Attitudes to Personality Disorder Questionnaire, Violence Prevention Climate Scale, Capabilities, Opportunities, and Motivation Scale, Coercion Experience Scale and Perceived Expressed Emotion in Staff Scale. Results: Completion rates of the proposed primary outcome were very good at 68% overall (excluding remote data collection), which increased to 76% (excluding remote data collection) in the post-intervention period. Secondary outcomes had high completion rates for both staff and patient respondents. Regression analyses indicated that reductions in conflict and containment were both predicted by study phase (pre, embedding, post intervention). There were no adverse events or serious adverse events related to the intervention. Conclusions: Intervention and data-collection procedures were feasible, and there was a signal of an effect on the proposed primary outcome. Limitations: Uncontrolled design and self-selecting sample. Future work: Definitive trial determining intervention effects. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN12826685 (closed to recruitment). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/101/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 3. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. Context: Conflict (a term used to describe a range of potentially unsafe events including violence, self-harm, rule-breaking, medication refusal, illicit drug and alcohol use and absconding) in mental health settings causes serious physical and psychological harm. Containment interventions which are intended to minimise harm from violence (and other conflict behaviours) such as restraint, seclusion and rapid tranquilisation can result in serious injuries to patients and, occasionally, death. Involvement in physical restraint is the most common cause of serious physical injury to National Health Service mental health staff in the United Kingdom. Violence to staff results in substantial costs to the health service in sickness and litigation payments. Containment interventions are also expensive (e.g. physical restraint costs mental health services £6.1 million and enhanced observations £88 million per annum). Despite these harms, recent findings indicate containment interventions such as seclusion and physical restraint continue to be used frequently in mental health settings. Clinical trials have demonstrated that interventions can reduce containment without increasing violence and other conflict behaviours (e.g. verbal aggression, self-harm). Substantial cost-savings result from reducing containment use. De-escalation, as an intervention to manage aggression and potential violence without restrictive practices, is a core intervention. 'De-escalation' is a collective term for a range of psychosocial techniques designed to reduce distress and anger without the need to use 'containment' interventions (measures to prevent harm through restricting a person's ability to act independently, such as physical restraint and seclusion). Evidence indicates that de-escalation involves ensuring conditions for safe intervention and effective communication are established, clarifying and attempting to resolve the patient's concern, conveyance of respect and empathy and regulating unhelpful emotions such as anxiety and anger. Despite featuring prominently in clinical guidelines and training policy domestically and internationally and being a component of mandatory National Health Service training, there is no evidence-based model on which to base training. A systematic review of de-escalation training effectiveness and acceptability conducted in 2015 concluded: (1) no model of training has demonstrated effectiveness in a sufficiently rigorous evaluation, (2) the theoretical underpinning of evaluated models was often unclear and (3) there has been inadequate investigation of the characteristics of training likely to enhance acceptability and uptake. Despite all National Health Service staff being trained in de-escalation there have been no high-quality trials evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of training. Feasibility studies are needed to establish whether it is possible to conduct a definitive trial that can determine the clinical, safety and cost-effectiveness of this intervention.

Mental health hospitals are stressful places for patients and staff. Patients are often detained against their will, in places that are noisy, unfamiliar and frightening. Violence and self-injury happen quite frequently. Sometimes staff physically restrain patients or isolate patients in locked rooms (called seclusion). While these measures might sometimes be necessary to maintain safety, they are psychologically and physically harmful. To help reduce the use of these unsafe measures, staff are trained in communication skills designed to reduce anger and distress without using physical force. Professionals call these skills 'de-escalation'. Although training in de-escalation is mandatory, there is no good evidence to say whether it works or not, or what specific techniques staff should be trained in. The Enhancing de-escalation techniques in adult acute and forensic units: Development and evaluation of an evidence-based training intervention (EDITION) project aimed to develop and evaluate a de-escalation training programme informed by research evidence. We interviewed over one hundred people who either worked in or received treatment in a mental health hospital. These people were clear that the training should target key sources of interpersonal and environmental stress that prevent de-escalation from working. We also reviewed all the scientific studies on de-escalation and training, aiming to identify the elements of training that are most likely to increase use of de-escalation. Then, in partnership with current mental health service users and clinical staff, we developed the training programme. Training was delivered to more than 270 staff working in 10 different wards in mental health hospitals. We measured rates of violence, self-injury and use of physical restraint and seclusion 8 weeks before staff received training and 16 weeks after they received training (24 weeks of data collection in total). Analysis of these data showed that these unsafe events were occurring significantly less frequently after training than they were before training, which raised the possibility that the training was helping to reduce harm.

Disparities in the Use of Chemical and Physical Restraints in the Emergency Department by Race/Ethnicity.

BACKGROUND: Restraints are often utilized in the emergency department (ED) to prevent patients from injuring themselves or others while managing their agitation in order to deliver appropriate medical care. Chemical and physical restraints are ordered at the discretion of the medical provider and typically employed after reasonable verbal de-escalation has been attempted. While health inequities and racial bias in medicine and healthcare have been well-established, information on the differences in the selection and use of restraints by race and ethnicity are scarce. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized national data from HCA Healthcare ED and inpatient database with patient visits from 2016 to 2019 to evaluate the relationships between race and ethnicity and the utilization of restraints in the ED. Associations are reported using linear and logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The study population included 12,229 unique ED admissions for patients 16 and older with diagnoses of aggression or agitation who had either chemical or physical restraints used. There was no statistically significant difference when comparing Black or other race to White patients and the type of restraint used. Hispanic patients received 0.206 fewer doses of chemical restraints compared to White patients (p = 0.008, 95% C.I. [-0.359, -0.053]) and were slightly less likely to receive physical restraints compared with White patients (p = 0.044, 95% C.I. [0.467, 0.989]), but there was no difference between use of physical restraint and Black or other patients compared to White patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this national sample of agitated and/or aggressive ED patients who were restrained, Hispanic patients were slightly less likely to receive physical restraints and received fewer doses of chemical restraints than White patients. There were no differences between Black or other patients compared to White patients in restraint type, number of doses of chemical restraint or time to application of either restraint type. This suggests that physicians apply the use of chemical restraints to agitated and aggressive ED patients based on factors that are not  associated with race and ethnicity.

Toward the Cessation of Seclusion and Mechanical Restraint Use in Psychiatric Hospitals: A Call for Regulatory Action.

The use of seclusion and mechanical restraints (S-R) in psychiatric hospitals remains widespread despite the traumatizing effects and risk for lethality associated with these practices. Neither the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) nor The Joint Commission (TJC) have updated their guidelines on the use of S-R since 2005. Their regulations do not include current best practices, such as the evidence-based six core strategies (6CS) or other trauma-informed approaches, despite robust data on their effectiveness in preventing violence and S-R use. The authors describe Pennsylvania State hospitals' nearly 10-year cessation of S-R use via their continuous adherence to 6CS. In contrast, the authors describe the significant decrease in S-R use during the implementation of 6CS at a public psychiatric hospital while under U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) monitoring and the resumption of high S-R use after DOJ monitoring and adherence to 6CS ended. The authors emphasize the importance of external regulatory oversight and mandates to safely achieve and sustain the cessation of S-R use in psychiatric hospitals. Urging CMS and TJC to update their regulations, the authors offer a roadmap to more effectively mandate the reduction and eventual cessation of S-R use in psychiatric hospitals.

Disparities in use of physical restraints at an urban, minority-serving hospital emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Recent reports have identified associations between patient race and ethnicity and use of physical restraint while receiving care in the emergency department (ED). However, no study has assessed this relationship in hospitals primarily treating patients of color and underserved populations. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the association between race/ethnicity and the use of restraints in an ED population at a minority-serving, safety-net institution. METHODS: For this cross-sectional study, chart review identified all adult patients presenting to the Boston Medical Center ED between January 2018 and April 2021. Generalized estimating equation logistic regression modeling was conducted to evaluate associations between race and use of restraints. RESULTS: Of 348,384 ED visits (22.9% White, 46.7% Black, 23.1% Hispanic), 1852 (0.5%) had an associated physical restraint order. Multivariable models showed significant interactions (p = 0.02) between race/ethnicity, behavioral health diagnosis, and sex on the primary outcome of physical restraint. Stratified analysis revealed that among patients with no behavioral health diagnoses, Black (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.72, p = 0.0003) and Hispanic (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20-0.63, p = 0.0004) patients had lower odds of restraint than White patients. Among female patients with a mental health and/or substance use disorder diagnosis, Black (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.49-2.54, p < 0.0001) and Hispanic (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.49-3.03, p < 0.0001) patients had higher odds of restraint than White patients. Similar trends were observed for Black male patients (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.34-1.91, p < 0.0001) but not for Hispanic male patients (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.73-1.26, p = 0.77) with behavioral health diagnoses who had similar odds of restraint to White patients. Additional factors associated with physical restraint include younger age, public or lack of insurance, and ED visits during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Racial disparities exist in restraint utilization at this minority-serving safety-net hospital; however, these disparities are modified by sex and by behavioral health diagnoses. The reasons for these disparities may be multifactorial and warrant further investigation.

Racial Disparities in Emergency Department Physical Restraint Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Recent studies have demonstrated that people of color are more likely to be restrained in emergency department (ED) settings compared with other patients, but many of these studies are based at a single site or health care system, limiting their generalizability. Objective: To synthesize existing literature on risk of physical restraint use in adult EDs, specifically in reference to patients of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL was performed from database inception to February 8, 2022. Study Selection: Included peer-reviewed studies met 3 criteria: (1) published in English, (2) original human participants research performed in an adult ED, and (3) reported an outcome of physical restraint use by patient race or ethnicity. Studies were excluded if they were conducted outside of the US, or if full text was unavailable. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Four independent reviewers (V.E., M.M., D.D., and A.H.) abstracted data from selected articles following Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. A modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess quality. A meta-analysis of restraint outcomes among minoritized racial and ethnic groups was performed using a random-effects model in 2022. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): Risk of physical restraint use in adult ED patients by racial and ethnic background. Results: The search yielded 1597 articles, of which 10 met inclusion criteria (0.63%). These studies represented 2 557 983 patient encounters and 24 030 events of physical restraint (0.94%). In the meta-analysis, Black patients were more likely to be restrained compared with White patients (RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.19-1.43) and to all non-Black patients (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23-1.31). With respect to ethnicity, Hispanic patients were less likely to be restrained compared with non-Hispanic patients (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.81-0.89). Conclusions and Relevance: Physical restraint was uncommon, occurring in less than 1% of encounters, but adult Black patients experienced a significantly higher risk of physical restraint in ED settings compared with other racial groups. Hispanic patients were less likely to be restrained compared with non-Hispanic patients, though this observation may have occurred if Black patients, with a higher risk of restraint, were included in the non-Hispanic group. Further work, including qualitative studies, to explore and address mechanisms of racism at the interpersonal, institutional, and structural levels are needed.

Characterizing Racial Disparities in Emergency Department Pediatric Physical Restraint by Sex and Age.

This cross-sectional study evaluates racial disparities in physical restraint use in US emergency departments.

Assessment of parental acceptance towards different non-pharmacological behaviour management techniques in pediatric dental care-a cross-sectional study.

It is imperative to manage children with empathy and concern for their well-being in order to carry out any dental procedure smoothly. Owing to the inherent fear of dental operatory, behaviour management of children is an important aspect of pediatric dental care. Many techniques are available to help manage the behaviour of children. It is, however important to educate parents about these techniques and to get their cooperation for these techniques to be used on their children.This study aimed to familiarize the parents with non-pharmacological behavior management techniques and to determine the parental acceptance of such techniques in children seeking dental treatment in specialty care dental units. A total of 303 parents were evaluated through online questionnaires in this research. They were shown videos of randomly selected non-pharmacologic behaviour management techniques including tell-show-do, positive reinforcement, modelling and voice control. Parents were asked to watch the videos and give their response on seven-items inquiring about their acceptance levels regarding the respective techniques. The responses were recorded on a Likert scales ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. According to parental acceptance score (PAS), positive reinforcement was the most accepted technique whereas voice control was the least acceptable technique. Majority of the parents were more receptive towards those techniques that involved a healthy and friendly communication between a dentist and the pediatric patient such as, positive reinforcement, tell show do and modelling. Most significantly the people having low socio-economic status (SES) in Pakistan were more acceptable of voice control than people with high SES.

Abdominal biofidelity assessment of 5th percentile female ATD responses relative to recently developed belt and bar loading corridors.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was the quantitative evaluation and comparison of the responses of the Hybrid III 5th percentile female (HIII-05F) and the 5th percentile female Test Device for Human Occupant Restraint (THOR-05F) anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) subjected to abdominal loading conditions. METHOD: The HIII-05F and THOR-05F were subjected to 3 different abdominal loading conditions: fixed-back belt pull (low compression), fixed-back belt pull (high compression), and free-back rigid bar impact at 6 m/s. The stroke of the impact was controlled to represent injurious and noninjurious loading conditions as observed in the experiments with postmortem human subjects (PMHS). Quantitative comparisons were made between the ATD abdominal force and compression responses and biofidelity corridors obtained from matched-pair PMHS tests under identical loading conditions, using the most recent version of the NHTSA Biofidelity Ranking System (BRS). RESULTS: The overall THOR-05F BRS scores across all tests (BRS score = 1.84) indicated good biofidelity. For the belt loading test conditions, the average BRS scores for both THOR-05F (BRS scores = 1.45 and 1.34) and HIII-05F (BRS scores = 1.42 and 1.01) showed good biofidelity. For the rigid bar loading condition, the THOR-05F (BRS score = 2.74) showed better biofidelity compared to HIII-05F (BRS score = 10.63), with the HIII-05F exhibiting poor performance in this condition. The average pressures recorded by the abdomen pressure twin sensors (APTS) in the current study ranged from 45 to 130 kPa, increasing proportionally with higher stroke and loading rate. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the THOR-05F BRS scores were better than the HIII-05F BRS scores, which suggests improved biofidelity of the THOR-05F abdomen. The abdominal insert in the HIII-05F did not provide enough room for compression, leading to higher stiffness and occupant motion as observed in the rigid bar tests. Because of practical challenges in measuring abdomen deflection in a soft ATD abdomen component, use of APTS in THOR-05F provides the ability to measure the restraint loading to the abdomen and assess the risk of abdominal injury. With good BRS scores observed in this study for THOR-05F, pressure and other measurements included in the THOR-05F may be used to develop abdominal injury risk functions in the future.

A current assessment of the THOR 50M in rear impacts.

OBJECTIVE: This study presents a comparison of the Test Device for Human Occupant Restraint (THOR) 50M and Hybrid III (HIII) 50M anthropomorphic test device (ATD) geometries and rear impact head and neck biofidelity to each other and to postmortem human surrogate (PMHS) data to evaluate the usefulness of the THOR in rear impact testing. METHODS: Both ATDs were scanned in a seated position on a rigid bench seat. A series of rear impact sled tests with the rigid bench seat with no head restraint support were conducted with a HIII-50M at 16 and 24 kph. Tests at each speed were performed twice with the THOR-50M to allow an assessment of the repeatability of the THOR-50M. A comparison of the test results from THOR-50M testing were made to the results of a previous study that included PMHS. Rear impact sled tests with both ATDs in a modern seat were then conducted at 40 kph. RESULTS: The THOR-50M head was 48.4 mm rearward and 60.1 mm higher than the HIII-50M head when seated in the rigid bench seat. In the repeated rigid bench testing at 16 and 24 kph, the THOR-50M head longitudinal and vertical accelerations, upper neck moment, and overall kinematics showed good test-to-test repeatability. In the rigid bench tests, the THOR-50M neck experienced flexion prior to extension in the 16 kph tests, where the neck of the HIII only experienced extension. At 24 kph both ATDs only experienced extension. The THOR-50M head displaced more rearward at both test velocities. The rigid bench tests show that the THOR-50M neck allows for more extension motion or articulation than the HIII-50M neck. The rigid bench test also shows that the head longitudinal and vertical accelerations, angular head kinematics, and upper neck moments were reasonably comparable between the ATDs. The THOR-50M results were closer to the average of the PMHS results than the HIII-50-M results, with the exception of the upper neck. In the 40 kph tests, with a modern seat design, the THOR-50M resulted in more deformation of the seatback with greater head restraint loading than the HIII-50M. The THOR-50M head backset distance was less. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into the differences and similarities between the THOR and the HIII-50M ATD geometries, instrumentation responses, and kinematics, as well as the repeatability of the THOR-50M in rear impacts testing. The overall geometries of the THOR-50M and the HIII-50M are similar. The seated head position of the THOR-50M is slightly further rearward and higher than the HIII-50M. The results indicate that the THOR-50M matches the PMHS results more closely than the HIII-50M and may have improved neck biofidelity in rear impact testing. The results indicate that the studied THOR-50M responses are repeatable within expected test-to-test variations in rear impacts. Early data suggest that the THOR-50M can be used in rear impact testing, though a more complete understanding of the THOR-50M differences to the HIII ATDs will allow for better correlation to the existing body of HIII rear impact testing.

Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: To identify and summarise extant knowledge about patient ethnicity and the use of various types of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings. METHODS: A scoping review methodological framework recommended by the JBI was used. A systematic search was conducted in APA PsycINFO, CINAHL with Full Text, Embase, PubMed and Scopus. Additionally, grey literature searches were conducted in Google, OpenGrey and selected websites, and the reference lists of included studies were explored. RESULTS: Altogether, 38 studies were included: 34 were primary studies; 4, reviews. The geographical settings were as follows: Europe (n = 26), Western Pacific (n = 8), Americas (n = 3) and South-East Asia (n = 1). In primary studies, ethnicity was reported according to migrant/national status (n = 16), mixed categories (n = 12), indigenous vs. non-indigenous (n = 5), region of origin (n = 1), sub-categories of indigenous people (n = 1) and religion (n = 1). In reviews, ethnicity was not comparable. The categories of restrictive practices included seclusion, which was widely reported across the studies (n = 20), multiple restrictive practices studied concurrently (n = 17), mechanical restraint (n = 8), rapid tranquillisation (n = 7) and manual restraint (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Ethnic disparities in restrictive practice use in adult mental health inpatient settings has received some scholarly attention. Evidence suggests that certain ethnic minorities were more likely to experience restrictive practices than other groups. However, extant research was characterised by a lack of consensus and continuity. Furthermore, widely different definitions of ethnicity and restrictive practices were used, which hampers researchers' and clinicians' understanding of the issue. Further research in this field may improve mental health practice.

Safeguarding patients while implementing mechanical restraints: A qualitative study of nurses and ward staff's perceptions and assessment.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore nurses' and ward staff's perceptions and assessments of patient care while implementing mechanical restraints. BACKGROUND: To prevent the risks associated with the use of restraints in psychiatry and ensure safe mental health care, it is necessary to know more about how the nursing staff experiences, comprehends and intervenes in managing patients subjected to coercive measures. DESIGN: This study employed a qualitative descriptive design, in accordance with the COREQ guidelines. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 nurses and ward staff aged between 22 and 45 years old, who had experience implementing mechanical restraints. Data were digitally audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Inductive thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo 12. RESULTS: The participants believed that mechanical restraints should be used as a last resort and that safeguarding patients during implementation is important; however, their assessments of the patients' physical and mental conditions varied. A clear difference emerged in how management qualified professionals handled situations prior to and during the implementation of mechanical coercive measures. CONCLUSIONS: The findings emphasise the need to focus on the assessment of patients prior to and during restraint, ensure the quality of safe implementation in a risk-of-harm situation, prioritise competence in education, and practice, and improve management. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The findings highlight the importance of assessing the physical and mental condition of patients while implementing restraints, as well as aiding the management, nurses and ward staff in tailoring safety procedures.

An Analysis of Risk-Assessment Driven Security Restraint Use during the Transport of Forensic Patients.

Transporting forensic psychiatric patients outside of forensic hospitals has significant risks that pose competing safety and patients' rights interests. Psychiatrists and hospital administrators have a duty to keep their staff and the community safe, but this must be carefully balanced with their obligation to uphold the civil rights and liberty interests of their patients. A critical decision in this balancing is whether to utilize security restraints during patient transportation. Addressing these competing interests while striving to safely transport forensic hospital patients to the community can be challenging as hospital staff and patient advocates may voice strong, and sometimes opposing, opinions about this debate. Very little research has been conducted about these high risk and often contentious actions. Here, we describe the process for assessing risk for violence, self-harm, and elopement prior to transportation at one state forensic hospital using a pretransport risk-assessment tool created specifically for that purpose. We then present the results of research identifying which clinical and legal factors identified by our risk-assessment tool correlate with patients being transported with restraints. We also evaluated the potential for racial/ethnic and gender biases in this transportation risk-assessment process.

Association of Black Race With Physical and Chemical Restraint Use Among Patients Undergoing Emergency Psychiatric Evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have examined the disproportionate use of restraints for Black adults receiving emergency psychiatric care. This study sought to determine whether the odds of physical and chemical restraint use were higher for Black patients undergoing emergency psychiatric care compared with their White counterparts. METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study examined 12,977 unique encounters of adults receiving an emergency psychiatric evaluation between January 1, 2014, and September 18, 2020, at a large academic medical center in Durham, North Carolina. Self-reported race categories were extracted from the electronic medical record. Primary outcomes were the presence of a behavioral physical restraint order or chemical restraint administration during the emergency department encounter. Covariates included age, sex, ethnicity, height, time of arrival, positive urine drug screen results, peak blood alcohol concentration, and diagnosis of a bipolar or psychotic disorder. RESULTS: A total of 961 (7.4%) encounters involved physical restraint, and 2,047 (15.8%) involved chemical restraint. Models with and without a race covariate were compared by using quasi-likelihood information criterion scores; in each instance, the model with race performed better than the model without. Black patients were more likely to be physically (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.07-1.72) and chemically (AOR=1.33; 95% CI=1.15-1.55) restrained than White patients. CONCLUSIONS: After analyses were adjusted for measured confounders, Black patients undergoing psychiatric evaluation were at higher odds of experiencing physical or chemical restraint compared with White patients, which is consistent with the growing body of evidence revealing racial disparities in psychiatric care.

Effects of the CMS' Public Reporting Program for Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities on Targeted and Nontargeted Safety: Differences Between For-Profits and Nonprofits.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services implemented the Inpatient Psychiatric Facility Quality Reporting Program in 2012, which publicly reports facilities' performance on restraint and seclusion (R-S) measures. Using data from Massachusetts, we examined whether nonprofits and for-profits responded differently to the program on targeted indicators, and if the program had a differential spillover effect on nontargeted indicators of quality by ownership. Episodes of R-S (targeted), complaints (nontargeted), and discharges were obtained for 2008-2017 through public records requests to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Using difference-in-differences estimators, we found no differential changes in R-S between for-profits and nonprofits. However, for-profits had larger increases in overall complaints, safety-related complaints, abuse-related complaints, and R-S-related complaints compared with nonprofits. This is the first study to examine the effects of a national public reporting program among psychiatric facilities on nontargeted measures. Researchers and policymakers should further scrutinize intended and unintended consequences of performance-reporting programs.

Excessive energy expenditure due to acute physical restraint disrupts Drosophila motivational feeding response.

To study the behavior of Drosophila, it is often necessary to restrain and mount individual flies. This requires removal from food, additional handling, anesthesia, and physical restraint. We find a strong positive correlation between the length of time flies are mounted and their subsequent reflexive feeding response, where one hour of mounting is the approximate motivational equivalent to ten hours of fasting. In an attempt to explain this correlation, we rule out anesthesia side-effects, handling, additional fasting, and desiccation. We use respirometric and metabolic techniques coupled with behavioral video scoring to assess energy expenditure in mounted and free flies. We isolate a specific behavior capable of exerting large amounts of energy in mounted flies and identify it as an attempt to escape from restraint. We present a model where physical restraint leads to elevated activity and subsequent faster nutrient storage depletion among mounted flies. This ultimately further accelerates starvation and thus increases reflexive feeding response. In addition, we show that the consequences of the physical restraint profoundly alter aerobic activity, energy depletion, taste, and feeding behavior, and suggest that careful consideration is given to the time-sensitive nature of these highly significant effects when conducting behavioral, physiological or imaging experiments that require immobilization.

Racial and ethnic disparities in emergency department restraint use: A multicenter retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Research regarding disparities in physical restraint use in the emergency department (ED) is limited. We evaluated the role of race, ethnicity, and preferred language on the application of physical restraint among ED patients held under a Massachusetts section 12(a) order for mandatory psychiatric evaluation. METHODS: We identified all ED patient encounters with a section 12(a) order across a large integrated 11-hospital health system from January 2018 through December 2019. Information on age, race, ethnicity, preferred language, insurance, mental illness, substance use, history of homelessness, and in-network primary care provider was obtained from the electronic health record. We evaluated for differences in physical restraint use between subgroups via a mixed-effect logistic regression with random-intercept model. RESULTS: We identified 32,054 encounters involving a section 12(a) order. Physical restraints were used in 2,458 (7.7%) encounters. Factors associated with physical restraint included male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.28 to 1.63), Black/African American race (aOR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.48), Hispanic ethnicity (aOR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.22 to 1.73), Medicaid insurance (aOR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.39), and a diagnosis of bipolar disorder or psychotic disorder (aOR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.31 to 1.74). Across all age groups, patients who were 25 to 34 years of age were at highest risk of restraint (aOR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.69 to 2.39). Patients with a primary care provider within our network (aOR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.72 to 0.92) were at lower risk of restraint. No associations were found between restraint use and language, history of alcohol or substance use, or homelessness. CONCLUSION: Black/African American and Hispanic patients under an involuntary mandatory emergency psychiatric evaluation hold order experience higher rates of physical restraint in the ED. Factors contributing to racial disparities in the use of physical restraint, including the potential role of structural racism and other forms of bias, merits further investigation.