Restraint in mental health settings: is it time to declare a position?

The emergence of a drive to reduce restrictive interventions has been accompanied particularly in the UK by a debate focussing on restraint positions. Any restraint intervention delivered poorly can potentially lead to serious negative outcomes. More research is required to reliably state the risk attached to a particular position in a particular clinical circumstance.Declaration of interestF.S. is a consultant psychiatrist in Psychiatric Intensive Care at the Maudsley Hospital, London. He is on the Executive Committee of the National Association of Psychiatric Intensive Care and Low Secure Units, and was a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guideline Development Group for the Short-Term Management of Aggression and Violence (2015). J.P. is a senior lecturer at the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Coventry University. E.B. is a consultant and expert witness in violence reduction and the use of physical interventions, independent expert to the High Secure Hospitals Violence Reduction Manual Steering Group and a member of the College of Policing Guideline Committee Steering Group and Mental Health Restraint Expert Reference Group. B.P. is the clinical director for Crisis and Aggression Limitation and Management (CALM) Training and formerly a senior lecturer for the Faculty of Health, University of Stirling. He is a nurse and psychotherapist and presently chairs the European Network for Training in the Management of Aggression. A.O'B. is a consultant psychiatrist, the Director of Educational Programmes for the National Association of Psychiatric Intensive Care and Low Secure Units, and the Dean for Students at St George's University of London.

Public mental health crisis management and Section 136 of the Mental Health Act.

The interface between mental health services and the criminal justice system presents challenges both for professionals and patients. Both systems are stressed and inherently complex. Section 136 of the Mental Health Act is unusual being both an aspect of the Mental Health Act and a power of arrest. It has a long and controversial history related to concerns about who has been detained and how the section was applied. More recently, Section 136 has had a public profile stemming from the use of police cells as places of safety for young, mentally disturbed individuals. This paper explores the current state of health of this piece of legislation. Specifically, we consider whether alternative approaches are more suitable for those individuals in crisis and/or distress who come into contact with the police. This requires careful thought as to the proper role of both health and criminal justice professionals who are daily grappling with an ethically contentious domain of multiagency work.

Acceptability and use of coercive methods across differing service configurations with and without seclusion and/or psychiatric intensive care units.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare across different service configurations the acceptability of containment methods to acute ward staff and the speed of initiation of manual restraint. BACKGROUND: One of the primary remits of acute inpatient psychiatric care is the reduction in risks. Where risks are higher than normal, patients can be transferred to a psychiatric intensive care unit or placed in seclusion. The abolition or reduction in these two containment methods in some hospitals may trigger compensatory increases in other forms of containment which have potential risks. How staff members manage risk without access to these facilities has not been systematically studied. DESIGN: The study applied a cross-sectional design. METHODS: Data were collected from 207 staff at eight hospital sites in England between 2013 - 2014. Participants completed two measures; the first assessing the acceptability of different forms of containment for disturbed behaviour and the second assessing decision-making in relation to the need for manual restraint of an aggressive patient. RESULTS: In service configurations with access to seclusion, staff rated seclusion as more acceptable and reported greater use of it. Psychiatric intensive care unit acceptability and use were not associated with its provision. Where there was no access to seclusion, staff were slower to initiate restraint. There was no relationship between acceptability of manual restraint and its initiation. CONCLUSION: Tolerance of higher risk before initiating restraint was evident in wards without seclusion units. Ease of access to psychiatric intensive care units makes little difference to restraint thresholds or judgements of containment acceptability.

Modelling admission lengths within psychiatric intensive care units.

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether discharge destination is a useful predictor variable for the length of admission within psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs). METHODS: A clinician-led process separated PICU admissions by discharge destination into three types and suggested other possible variables associated with length of stay. Subsequently, a retrospective study gathered proposed predictor variable data from a total of 368 admissions from four PICUs. Bayesian models were developed and analysed. RESULTS: Clinical patient-type grouping by discharge destination displayed better intraclass correlation (0.37) than any other predictor variable (next highest was the specific PICU to which a patient was admitted (0.0585)). Patients who were transferred to further secure care had the longest PICU admission length. The best model included both patient type (discharge destination) and unit as well as an interaction between those variables. DISCUSSION: Patient typing based on clinical pathways shows better predictive ability of admission length than clinical diagnosis or a specific tool that was developed to identify patient needs. Modelling admission lengths in a Bayesian fashion could be expanded and be useful within service planning and monitoring for groups of patients. CONCLUSION: Variables previously proposed to be associated with patient need did not predict PICU admission length. Of the proposed predictor variables, grouping patients by discharge destination contributed the most to length of stay in four different PICUs.

Sexual and reproductive health needs assessment and interventions in a female psychiatric intensive care unit.

AIMS AND METHOD: To assess the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs of women admitted to a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU), and acceptability of delivering specialist SRH assessments and interventions in this setting. Within a quality improvement framework, staff were trained, a clinical protocol developed and clinical interventions made accessible. RESULTS: Thirty per cent of women were identified as having unmet SRH needs and proceeded to a specialist appointment, representing a 2.5-fold increase in unmet need detection. Forty-two per cent of women were assessed, representing a 3.5-fold increase in uptake. Twenty-one per cent of women initiated SRH interventions, of which 14% had all their SRH needs met. Staff, patients and carers highlighted the acceptability and importance of SRH care, if interventions were appropriately timed and patients' individual risk profiles were considered. Barriers to access included lack of routine enquiry, illness acuity and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: SRH needs for PICU admissions are greater than previously realised. Providing a nurse-led SRH assessment is acceptable, feasible and beneficial for PICU patients.

Mitigating inequalities at a large COVID-19 vaccination centre.

Introduction: The COVID-19 vaccination service is a key component in the UK approach to reducing disease morbidity and mortality. Groups within the population at increased risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19 overlap with groups that are less likely to take up the offer of vaccination. This article outlines some learning from approaches within a large vaccination centre in the UK to reduce inequalities. Solution: Continuous quality improvement processes were used to operationalise the mitigations to inequalities with vaccination uptake that were identified by a systematic equality impact assessment framework and continuous service feedback. Outcome: Quality improvement processes and community engagement enabled tailored mitigations to vaccination uptake. Engagement with community ambassadors strengthened community relationships and the co-creation of bespoke sessions encouraged vaccination uptake within specific groups. Conclusion: Recommendations for strengthening approaches to inequality reduction include having a systematic framework for assessment and mitigation of inequalities, embedding quality improvement, identifying resources, and taking a collaborative and co-design approach to services with underserved groups.

The COVID-19 pandemic from an acute psychiatric perspective: a London psychiatric intensive care unit experience.

The COVID-19 pandemic has put the UK's National Health Service under extreme pressure, and acute psychiatric services have had to rapidly adapt to a new way of working. This editorial describes the experience of a London psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU) where all nine in-patients ultimately tested COVID-19 positive.

Joint BAP NAPICU evidence-based consensus guidelines for the clinical management of acute disturbance: De-escalation and rapid tranquillisation.

The British Association for Psychopharmacology and the National Association of Psychiatric Intensive Care and Low Secure Units developed this joint evidence-based consensus guideline for the clinical management of acute disturbance. It includes recommendations for clinical practice and an algorithm to guide treatment by healthcare professionals with various options outlined according to their route of administration and category of evidence. Fundamental overarching principles are included and highlight the importance of treating the underlying disorder. There is a focus on three key interventions: de-escalation, pharmacological interventions pre-rapid tranquillisation and rapid tranquillisation (intramuscular and intravenous). Most of the evidence reviewed relates to emergency psychiatric care or acute psychiatric adult inpatient care, although we also sought evidence relevant to other common clinical settings including the general acute hospital and forensic psychiatry. We conclude that the variety of options available for the management of acute disturbance goes beyond the standard choices of lorazepam, haloperidol and promethazine and includes oral-inhaled loxapine, buccal midazolam, as well as a number of oral antipsychotics in addition to parenteral options of intramuscular aripiprazole, intramuscular droperidol and intramuscular olanzapine. Intravenous options, for settings where resuscitation equipment and trained staff are available to manage medical emergencies, are also included.

Personality disorder services in England: findings from a national survey.

Aims and method We aimed to evaluate the availability and nature of services for people affected by personality disorder in England by conducting a survey of English National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts and independent organisations. Results In England, 84% of organisations reported having at least one dedicated personality disorder service. This represents a fivefold increase compared with a 2002 survey. However, only 55% of organisations reported that patients had equal access across localities to these dedicated services. Dedicated services commonly had good levels of service use and carer involvement, and engagement in education, research and training. However, a wider multidisciplinary team and a greater number of biopsychosocial interventions were available through generic services. Clinical implications There has been a substantial increase in service provision for people affected by personality disorder, but continued variability in the availability of services is apparent and it remains unclear whether quality of care has improved.

Women in acute psychiatric units, their characteristics and needs: a review.

Aims and method Recent policy guidelines published by the Department of Health highlight the need to develop gender-sensitive psychiatric services. However, very little is currently known about the specific characteristics and needs of female patients entering acute psychiatric wards, particularly psychiatric intensive care units. This article aims to review the current literature on what is known about this group of patients. PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO were systematically searched using a number of key terms. Results A total of 27 articles were obtained. The findings were divided into four categories: admission characteristics, treatment needs, risk management and outcomes after discharge. Gender differences were found in diagnosis and presentation. Clinical implications The differences observed in the reviewed studies suggest that women may have different assessment and treatment needs, and ultimately, different philosophies of care. A dearth of studies in this area indicates that if services are to develop in line with government policies, more research is needed.