Patient and practitioner perspectives on the design of a simulated affective touch device to reduce procedural anxiety associated with radiotherapy: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to elicit the views of relevant stakeholders on the design of a device using simulated affective touch to reduce procedural anxiety surrounding radiotherapy and imaging. DESIGN: This qualitative study collected data from focus groups which were then analysed using inductive thematic analysis in line with Braun and Clarke's methods. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Twenty patients and carers were recruited, as well as 10 healthcare practitioners involved in either delivering radiotherapy or imaging procedures. RESULTS: Patients, carers and healthcare practitioners agreed on some aspects of the device design, such as ensuring the device is warm and flexible in where it can be used on the body. However, patient and healthcare practitioner cohorts had at times differing viewpoints. For example, healthcare practitioners provided professional perspectives and required easy cleaning of the device. Meanwhile patients focused on anxiety-relieving factors, such as the tactile sensation of the device being either a vibration or pulsation. There was no consensus on who should control the device. CONCLUSIONS: The desired features of a simulated affective touch device have been investigated. Different priorities of patients and their carers and healthcare practitioners were evident. Any design must incorporate such features as to appease both groups. Areas where no consensus was reached could be further explored, alongside including further patient and public involvement in the form of a project advisory group.

A Principlist Justification of Physical Restraint in the Emergency Department.

The ethics of physical restraint in the Emergency Department (and elsewhere) has always been an emotive and controversial issue. Recently a vanguard of advocacy groups and regulatory agencies have been aiming to reduce and optimize its use, resulting in new guidance around physical restraint. This article considers prevailing opinions surrounding physical restraint in the Emergency Department using a Principlist model of medical ethics (specifically that of Beauchamp and Childress' four pillars). It also examines the ethical underpinning of the new guidance on the usage of restraint. Ultimately, examination from a Principlist perspective suggests the use of physical restraint in the Emergency Department is justified, as long as it is used carefully. Despite this, physical restraint can have severe physical and psychological consequences for patients, and work needs to be continued into its reduction and optimization.