International variation in containment measures for disturbed psychiatric inpatients: a comparative survey questionnaire

Bowers, Len and van der Werf, Bert and Vokkolainen, Aila and Muir-Cochrane, Eimear and Allan, Teresa and Alexander, Jane (2007) International variation in containment measures for disturbed psychiatric inpatients: a comparative survey questionnaire. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44 (3). pp. 357-364. ISSN 0020-7489

Documents
International variation in containment measures for disturbed psychiatric inpatients: a comparative survey questionnaire
[img]
[Download]
[img] PDF
uoa12ja05.pdf
Restricted to Repository staff only

3819Kb

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.01.005

Abstract

Background:

Disturbed psychiatric inpatients are managed using a range of containment measures (e.g. seclusion, mechanical restraint) whose use differs by country. Little is known about why these differences exist, or about how staff choose between the different methods available to them.

Aims:

To compare psychiatric professionals attitudes to containment measures between countries with different practices, and to discover what factors have the greatest impact on preparedness to use a containment method.

Method:

Surveys of psychiatric professionals in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Finland, and Australia, using the Attitude to Containment Measures Questionnaire.

Results:

Relative approval of different containment measures broadly matched what we know about different practices, with some notable differences. Staff in Finland expressed the highest level of approval of containment, staff in the UK the least, with those in the Netherlands in between. Individuals’ preferences for different containment measures were largely determined by whether they considered it (i) safe for the patients undergoing it, (ii) prevented them from injuring others, and (iii) quickly calmed them.

Conclusion:

Future evaluation research on containment measures should use time taken to calm the patient, injury to patients and others, as primary outcomes. National clinical audit and injury reporting systems would also enable the identification of methods that are truly physically injurious to patients, aiding in the rational selection of appropriate containment measures.

Item Type:Article
Additional Information:Background: Disturbed psychiatric inpatients are managed using a range of containment measures (e.g. seclusion, mechanical restraint) whose use differs by country. Little is known about why these differences exist, or about how staff choose between the different methods available to them. Aims: To compare psychiatric professionals attitudes to containment measures between countries with different practices, and to discover what factors have the greatest impact on preparedness to use a containment method. Method: Surveys of psychiatric professionals in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Finland, and Australia, using the Attitude to Containment Measures Questionnaire. Results: Relative approval of different containment measures broadly matched what we know about different practices, with some notable differences. Staff in Finland expressed the highest level of approval of containment, staff in the UK the least, with those in the Netherlands in between. Individuals’ preferences for different containment measures were largely determined by whether they considered it (i) safe for the patients undergoing it, (ii) prevented them from injuring others, and (iii) quickly calmed them. Conclusion: Future evaluation research on containment measures should use time taken to calm the patient, injury to patients and others, as primary outcomes. National clinical audit and injury reporting systems would also enable the identification of methods that are truly physically injurious to patients, aiding in the rational selection of appropriate containment measures.
Keywords:Psychiatric nursing, Containment, Restraint, Comparative studies
Subjects:B Subjects allied to Medicine > B760 Mental Health Nursing
Divisions:College of Social Science > School of Health & Social Care
ID Code:744
Deposited By: Bev Jones
Deposited On:26 Apr 2007
Last Modified:13 Mar 2013 08:23

Repository Staff Only: item control page