The use of seclusion in the Netherlands compared to countries in and outside Europe

Characteristics and correlates of seclusion and mechanical restraint measures in a Parisian psychiatric hospital group

Introduction

Seclusion or restraint (S/R) are last-resort measures used in psychiatry to ensure the safety of the patient and the staff. However, they have harmful physical and psychological effects on patients, and efforts to limit their use are needed. We describe the characteristics and correlates of S/R events in four Parisian psychiatric centers.

Methods

Within a 3-month period, November 5, 2018 to February 3, 2019, we recorded data for patients experiencing an S/R measure as well as characteristics of the measures. We studied the mean duration of a S/R event, the time between hospital admission and the occurrence of the event, as well as correlates of these durations. We also examined factors associated with use of a restraint versus a seclusion measure.

Results

For the 233 patients included, we recorded 217 seclusion measures and 64 mechanical restraints. Seclusion measures mostly occurred after the patient's transfer from the emergency department. The duration of a seclusion measure was about 10 days. Patients considered resistant to psychotropic treatments more frequently had a longer seclusion duration than others. The mean duration of a mechanical restraint measure was 4 days. Male sex and younger age were associated with experiencing mechanical restraint.

Discussion

S/R measures mostly occur among patients perceived as resistant to psychotropic drugs who are arriving from the emergency department. Developing specific emergency department protocols might be useful in limiting the use of coercive measures.

The use of coercive measures in a high security setting in Belgium: Prevalence and risk factors

Coercive measures are often used in forensic psychiatric settings as a strategy to manage violent and other problematic behavior. Few studies have been published regarding the use of coercive measures in high security populations. This is the first empirical study on this subject in Belgium. The aim of the present study was to examine the prevalence rates of coercive measures in Flanders' two high security settings and to identify individual patient risk factors for being subjected to a coercive measure. The study included all patients (N = 654) who were admitted in the Forensic Psychiatric Centres of Antwerp or Ghent over a six-year period. Data on the use of coercive measures (seclusion, mechanical restraint, and chemical restraint) were registered prospectively. Several regression analyses were conducted with multiple independent variables. The results show that half of the population (50.3%) was subjected to at least one coercive measure during admission in one of the high security settings. A small subgroup of patients (6.4%) was the subject of half of all coercive measures (50,4%). Seclusion was the most frequently used coercive measure (48.3%), followed by chemical restraint (20.2%). The prevalence rate of mechanical restraint was very low (0.8%) compared to previous research in similar populations. Various individual risk factors were significantly associated with a higher use of coercive measures. Clinical implications are discussed and the importance of developing international standards on recording and reporting on coercive measures is highlighted.

Measuring Seclusion in Psychiatric Intensive Care: Development and Measurement Properties of the Clinical Seclusion Checklist

Background: Acute psychiatric units in general hospitals must ensure that acutely disturbed patients do not harm themselves or others, and simultaneously provide care and treatment and help patients regain control of their behavior. This led to the development of strategies for the seclusion of a patient in this state within a particular area separated from other patients in the ward. While versions of this practice have been used in different countries and settings, a systematic framework for describing the various parameters and types of seclusion interventions has not been available. The aims of the project were to develop and test a valid and reliable checklist for characterizing seclusion in inpatient psychiatric care. Methods: Development and testing of the checklist were accomplished in five stages. Staff in psychiatric units completed detailed descriptions of seclusion episodes. Elements of seclusion were identified by thematic analysis of this material, and consensus regarding these elements was achieved through a Delphi process comprising two rounds. Good content validity was ensured through the sample of seclusion episodes and the representative participants in the Delphi process. The first draft of the checklist was revised based on testing by clinicians assessing seclusion episodes. The revised checklist with six reasons for and 10 elements of seclusion was tested with different response scales, and acceptable interrater reliability was achieved. Results: The Clinical Seclusion Checklist is a brief and feasible tool measuring six reasons for seclusion, 10 elements of seclusion, and four contextual factors. It was developed through a transparent process and exhibited good content validity and acceptable interrater reliability. Conclusion: The checklist is a step toward achieving valid and clinically relevant measurements of seclusion. Its use in psychiatric units may contribute to quality assurance, more reliable statistics and comparisons across sites and periods, improved research on patients' experiences of seclusion and its effects, reduction of negative consequences of seclusion, and improvement of psychiatric intensive care.

The Compulsory Care Act: Early Observations and Expectations of In- or Outpatient Involuntary Treatment

BACKGROUND

On January 1, 2020, the Dutch Compulsory Care Act (WvGGZ) replaced the Special Admissions Act (BOPZ). While the old law only allowed compulsory treatment in hospitals, the new law allows it both inside and outside the hospital. Moreover, the new law prioritizes the patient's own opinion on coercive measures. By following patients' own choices, the Compulsory Care Act is hoped to lead to fewer admission days and less inpatient compulsory treatment in involuntarily admitted patients.

METHODS

We studied the seclusion and enforced-medication events before and after January 1, 2020, using coercive measures monitoring data in a Mental Health Trust. Trends in hours of seclusion and the number of enforced-medication events per month from 2012 to 2019 were compared with 2020. We used generalized linear models to perform time series analysis. Logistic regression analyses and generalized linear models were performed to investigate whether patient compilation determined some of the observed changes in seclusion use or enforced-medication events.

RESULTS

The mean number of hours of seclusion between 2012 and 2019 was 27,124 per year, decreasing from 48,542 in 2012 to 21,133 in 2019 to 3,844 h in 2020. The mean incidence of enforced-medication events between 2012 and 2019 was 167, increasing from 90 in 2012 to 361 in 2019 and then fell to 294 in 2020. In 2020, we observed 3,844 h of seclusion and 294 enforced-medication events. Near to no outpatient coercion was reported, even though it was warranted. The time series analysis showed a significant effect of the year 2020 on seclusion hours (β = -1.867; Exp(β) = 0.155, Wald = 27.22, p = 0.001), but not on enforced-medication events [β = 0.48; Exp(β) = 1.616, Wald = 2.33, p = 0.13].

DISCUSSION

There was a reduction in the number of seclusion hours after the introduction of the Compulsory Care Act. The number of enforced-medication events also increased from a very low baseline, but from 2017 onwards. To see whether these findings are consistent over time, they need to be replicated in the near future.

CONCLUSION

We observed a significant increase in enforced-medication use and a decrease in seclusion hours. The year 2020 predicted seclusion hours, but not enforced-medication events.

Number of Seclusions in the Netherlands Higher in the 7 Years Since the End of a Nationwide Seclusion-Reduction Program

Introduction: Between 2006 and 2012 the Dutch government funded a nationwide program for reducing the use of seclusion. Although an initial first trend study showed that the reported number of seclusions declined during the program, the objective of a 10% annual decrease was not met. We wished to establish whether the decline had continued after funding ended in 2012. Method: Using quasi Poisson time series modeling, we retrospectively analyzed the nationally reported numbers of seclusion and involuntary medication between 1998 and 2019, i.e., before, during and after the end of the nationwide program, with and without correction for the number of involuntary admissions. Results: With and without correction for the number of involuntary admissions, there were more seclusions in the seven years after the nationwide program than during the nationwide program. Although the reported number of involuntary medications also increased, the rate of increase was slower after the end of the nationwide program than before. Conclusions: Rather than continuing to decrease after the end of the nationwide program, the number of seclusions rose. This may mean that interventions intended to reduce the use of seclusion within this program are not properly sustained in daily clinical care without an ongoing national program.

Three Pathways of Seclusion Reduction Programs to Sustainability: Ten Years Follow Up in Psychiatry

From 2004 onwards, above 50 seclusion reduction programs (SRP) were developed, implemented and evaluated in the Netherlands. However, little is known about their sustainability, as to which extent obtained reduction could be maintained. This study monitored three programs over ten years seeking to identify important factors contributing to this. We reviewed documents of three SRPs that received governmental funding to reduce seclusion. Next, we interviewed key figures from each institute, to investigate the SRP documents and their implementation in practice. We monitored the number of seclusion events and the number of seclusion days with the Argus rating scale over ten years in three separate phases: 2008-2010, 2011-2014 and 2015-2017. As we were interested in sustainability after the governmental funding ended in 2012, our focus was on the last phase. Although in different rate, all mental health institutes showed some decline in seclusion events during and immediately after the SRP. After end of funding one institute showed numbers going up and down. The second showed an increase in number of seclusion days. The third institute displayed a sustained and continuous reduction in use of seclusion, even several years after the received funding. This institute was the only one with an ongoing institutional SRP after the governmental funding. To sustain accomplished seclusion reduction, a continuous effort is needed for institutional awareness of the use of seclusion, even after successful implementation of SRPs. If not, successful SRPs implemented in psychiatry will easily relapse in traditional use of seclusion.

What factors influence the decisions of mental health professionals to release service users from seclusion?

Mental health policy stipulates seclusion should only be used as an intervention of last resort and for the minimum possible duration. Current evidence details which service users are more likely to be secluded, why they are secluded, and what influences the decision to seclude them. However, very little is known about the decision to release service users from seclusion. An integrative review was undertaken to explore the decision-making processes of mental health professionals which guide the ending of seclusion. The review used a systematic approach to gather and thematically analyse evidence within a framework approach. The twelve articles identified generated one overriding theme, maintaining safety. In addition, several subthemes emerged including the process of risk assessing which was dependent upon interaction and control, mediated by factors external to the service user such as the attitude and experience of staff and the acuity of the environment. Service users were expected to demonstrate compliance with the process ultimately ending in release and reflection. Little evidence exists regarding factors influencing mental health professionals in decisions to release service users from seclusion. There is no evidence-based risk assessment tool, and service users are not routinely involved in the decision to release them. Support from experienced professionals is vital to ensure timely release from seclusion. Greater insight into influences upon decisions to discontinue episodes may support initiatives aimed at reducing durations and use of seclusion.

Long-Term Impact of a Tailored Seclusion Reduction Program: Evidence for Change?

International comparative studies show that Dutch seclusion rates are relatively high. Therefore, several programs to change this practice were developed and implemented. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a seclusion reduction program over a long time frame, from 2004 until 2013. Three phases could be identified; the phase of development and implementation of the program (2004-2007), the project phase (2008-2010) and the consolidation phase (2011-2013). Five inpatient wards of a mental health institute were monitored. Each ward had one or more seclusion rooms. Primary outcome were the number and the duration of seclusion incidents. Involuntary medication was monitored as well to rule out substitution of one coercive measure by another. Case mix correction for patient characteristics was done by a multi-level logistic regression analysis with patient characteristics as predictors and hours seclusion per admission hours as outcome. Seclusion use reduced significantly during the project phase, both in number (-73%) and duration (-80%) and was not substituted by the use of enforced medication. Patient compilation as analyzed by the multi- level regression seemed not to confound the findings. Findings show a slight increase in number and seclusion days over the last year of monitoring. Whether this should be interpreted as a continuous or temporary trend remains unclear and is subject for further investigation.

Cross-sectional study on nurses' attitudes regarding coercive measures: the importance of socio-demographic characteristics, job satisfaction, and strategies for coping with stress

BACKGROUND

Coercive measures are containment methods used in psychiatry to curb patients' disruptive and aggressive behaviours towards themselves, others or objects. The prevalence of the practice of coercive measures in psychiatry is directly related to the attitudes of the staff. When discussing these attitudes, nurses are often particularly singled out. The purpose of the study is to research the impact of individual factors on nurses' attitudes in the decision-making process for the use of coercive measures.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study among all psychiatric nursing staff in Slovenia (n = 367, 79%) was conducted over the years 2013/2014. Standardized questionnaires were used, including a survey of nurses' attitudes to the use of seclusion, the Job Descriptive Index, and the Folkman-Lazarus test.

RESULTS

Nurses' attitudes towards special coercive measures are predominantly negative ([Formula: see text] = 11.312, SD = 2.641). The factors that explain a positive attitude are as follows: female gender (β = - 0.236, p <  0.001), fewer years of service (β = - 0.149, p = 0.023), emotion-focused strategies of coping with stress (β = 0.139, p = 0.020), and less-threatening patient behaviour (β = 0.157, p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

The effects of some known factors did not prove important in the model. Newly recognized factors are "less-threatening patient behaviour" and "emotion-focused strategies of coping with stress". Therefore, attitudes towards special coercive measures in psychiatry must be regarded as contextualized, interactive, and multidimensional phenomena that cannot be explained merely through a defined set of factors.

[Predictive factors of seclusion duration in patients hospitalized in psychiatry settings. A prospective multisite study in the DTRF Paris-Sud]

INTRODUCTION

In psychiatric inpatient settings seclusion is a last resort to ensure the safety of the patient, other patients, and staff from disturbed behaviors. Despite its major interest for patients, seclusion could negatively impact treatment adherence and patient/staff relationships. Indeed, some secluded patients report a feeling of guilt during the measure and do not consider seclusion to be a healthcare intervention. To be more beneficial and to reduce the feeling by patients of being forced, seclusions should be as short and rare as possible. In other words, measures to reduce seclusion are available and have been clearly identified. Such measures could be applied, in the first instance, in patients with longer duration. In this way, the aim of this study was to investigate predictive factors of a seclusion of long duration.

METHODS

Our study was based on the dataset of the EPIC study, an observational prospective French multicenter study of seclusion and restraint. The EPIC study occurred in seven French psychiatric hospitals in the southern region of Paris. Inclusions were realized for 73days and allowed a data collection of 302 seclusion measures. Of these measures 236 were effectively a seclusion in a standardized room. Because the median duration was 7days, we defined two groups of patients: duration<7days and duration ≥ 7 days. Our variable to be explicated was duration ≥ 7 days. Explicative variables available in EPIC study were age, sex, forced hospitalization, autoagressivity, heteroagressivity, use of sedative treatment (oral or intramuscular), history of seclusion and patient diagnoses. We used bivariate and multivariate analyses to explore the association between a seclusion duration ≥ 7 days and explicative variables. Diagnoses were classified as psychotic disorders, mood disorders and others diagnoses. To be included in multivariate logistic regressions, diagnoses were treated as dummy variables (mood disorder vs psychotic disorders; psychotic disorders vs others; mood disorders vs others). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software 20.0 and R 3.4.0.

RESULTS

Of the 236 measures of seclusion the mean age was 38.2 (±12.8), 196 (83%) patients were forcibly hospitalized prior to their seclusion, 147 (62%) had a diagnosis of psychotic disorder, 43 (18%) a diagnosis of mood disorder and 33 (14%) an "other diagnosis". Mean duration was 10.2 (1.5) days and median was 7.1 days. One hundred and thirty-five (47%) patients were in the group of duration ≥ 7 days. In bivariate analyses, variables associated with a duration ≥ 7 days were: being in forced hospitalization prior to the seclusion (P=0.04), administration of a sedative treatment (P=0.01) and against the group of others diagnoses the diagnosis of mood disorders (P<0.0005) and psychotic disorders (P=0.001). Multivariate analyses showed that, against the group of other diagnoses, the group of psychotic disorders [OR=3.3, CI 95% (1.3-8.4), P=0.01], the group of mood disorder [OR=2.7, CI 95% (1.4-4.9), P=0.002] and administration of sedative treatment [OR=8.1, CI 95% (2.0-32.5), P=0.003] were significantly associated with a duration ≥ 7 days. These results were independent from other confusion variables. Considering the hospitalization status, psychotic disorders was the only diagnosis which showed an association between duration ≥ 7 days and forced hospitalization [OR=2.9 CI 95% (1.1-7.8), P=0.03].

CONCLUSION

Our study highlighted two profiles of higher risk to remain ≥ 7days in seclusion. The first one is patients with a diagnosis of mood disorder who needed sedative treatment. The second one is patients with a diagnosis of psychotic disorder who needed sedative treatment and forced hospitalized before seclusion. Thus, these two profiles could be a good target to practice, in the first instance, measures to reduce seclusion duration in psychiatry settings.

Associations between psychiatric symptoms and seclusion use: Clinical implications for care planning

Findings from an increasing number of studies suggest that incorporating systematic short-term risk assessments in treatment planning could lead to safer practice on psychiatric admissions wards. The aim of the present study was to investigate the associations between the scores of three structured observation tools - the Kennedy Axis V (K-Axis-V), the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), and the Social Dysfunction and Aggression Scale (SDAS) - and seclusion. In total, 1840 weekly risk assessments with these observation scales were collected over 2342 admission weeks. These assessment scores related to 370 acutely-admitted psychiatric patients and were subjected to a multilevel analysis. It was found that several dynamic and static factors were related to seclusion. Dynamic factors included violent behaviour, current substance abuse, suspiciousness, and negativism. Static factors included ethnicity and having been diagnosed with a substance abuse disorder. The findings suggest that the incorporation of the Kennedy-Axis V, the BPRS, and the SDAS into standard practice might be helpful in identifying patients at high risk of seclusion, and could be supportive to treatment planning and clinical decision-making in the prevention of seclusion use in acute psychiatric settings.

Seclusion and enforced medication in dealing with aggression: A prospective dynamic cohort study

BACKGROUND

In the Netherlands, seclusion is historically the measure of first choice in dealing with aggressive incidents. In 2010, the Mediant Mental Health Trust in Eastern Netherlands introduced a policy prioritising the use of enforced medication to manage aggressive incidents over seclusion. The main goal of the study was to investigate whether prioritising enforced medication over seclusion leads to a change of aggressive incidents and coercive measures.

METHODS

The study was carried out with data from 2764 patients admitted between 2007 and 2013 to the hospital locations of the Mediant Mental Health Trust in Eastern Netherlands, with a catchment area of 500,000 inhabitants. Seclusion, restraint and enforced medications as well as other coercive measures were gathered systematically. Aggressive incidents were assessed with the SOAS-R. An event sequence analysis was preformed, to assess the whether seclusion, restraint or enforced medication were used or not before or after aggressive incidents.

RESULTS

Enforced medication use went up by 363% from a very low baseline. There was a marked reduction of overall coercive measures by 44%. Seclusion hours went down by 62%. Aggression against staff or patients was reduced by 40%.

CONCLUSIONS

When dealing with aggression, prioritising medication significantly reduces other coercive measures and aggression against staff, while within principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and expediency.

One-year incidence and prevalence of seclusion: Dutch findings in an international perspective

BACKGROUND

The Netherlands started a nationwide coercion reduction program in 2007. In 2011, accurate registration of coercive measures became obligatory by law.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare number and duration of coercive measures in the Netherlands with international data.

METHODS

2011 data on coercive measures were collected, using a system developed in Germany. To understand determinants of coercion, multilevel logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

12.0 % (n = 5169) of patients (n = 42.960) in 2011 experienced at least one coercive measure. Exposure to coercion was comparable to other countries, and duration was higher. Medication use seemed to half average times in seclusion. In the Netherlands, coercion mainly constituted of seclusion and occurred in bipolar and psychotic disorders. In Germany, coercion was mostly mechanical restraint and occurred in organic disorders and schizophrenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Gathering comprehensive data allows comparisons between countries, increasing our understanding of the impact of different cultures, legislation and health care systems on coercion. In the Netherlands, seclusion is still the main type of coercion, despite significant improvements in the last few years. It is shorter when applied in combination with enforced medication.

Use of control interventions in adult in-patient mental health services

This study examined the prevalence of Control Intervention (CI) use in adult in-patient psychiatric units/hospitals in Ontario and developed a profile of those patients who had CI use during their admission between April 2006 and March 2010. Control intervention types included mechanical/physical, chair prevents rising, acute control medications, and seclusion. The profiles of patients with control intervention use included an examination of sociodemographic, mental health service use, and mental health clinical characteristics.

Seclusion and the importance of contextual factors: An innovation project revisited

Variation in seclusion rates between psychiatric facilities cannot be adequately explained by patient characteristics alone and there is a growing awareness of the influence of 'cultural' and staff factors on the use of seclusion. In this study, staff variables as well as seclusion parameters were investigated during the implementation of an innovation project, against the background of an institutional program to reduce the use of coercive measures. The results demonstrate the impact of confidence within the team, staffing level and communication with the patient on nurses' decisions on seclusion. The importance of the organizational context is further illustrated by the negative effects of organizational instability on nurses' attitudes and decision making with respect to seclusion, and on seclusion rates. A reduction in the use of seclusion was achieved after the implementation of the innovation project; however, during a period of organizational turmoil, the work engagement scores of staff decreased and the use of seclusion increased. The results of this study show the vulnerability of innovations within the continuously changing organizational context of mental health care.

Seclusion as a necessary vs. an appropriate intervention: a vignette study among mental health nurses

In a vignette study, mental health nurses were asked to score vignettes on necessity and appropriateness using a Likert scale. Sixty-nine clinical nurses from four mental health institutes scored 64 vignettes on necessity (there is no alternative) and appropriateness (seclusion supports patients' treatment) of seclusion simultaneously. Data analysis focused on the differences between both scores, and included general linear model analysis, t-test statistics and Kendall's tau. The t-test resulted in a significantly higher score on necessity than on appropriateness. Differences between both scores could be explained for 32% by a combination of nurse characteristics and vignette variables. Necessity and appropriateness were found to be strongly associated with each other, showing that underpinning patterns were largely the same. This research enhances the understanding of underlying factors that influence the decision of nurses to use seclusion. This is essential for the development of interventions aimed at the reduction of seclusion use in mental health practice.

[Coercive measures in psychiatric clinics in Germany: current practice (2012)]

BACKGROUND

Due to the decisions of the German Constitutional Court on involuntary medication and the law on the prohibition of video surveillance in psychiatry in Nordrhine-Westfalia there has been an increasing discussion on coercive measures and how to conduct, supervise and prevent them. We conducted an online survey on the current practice of coercive measures in German psychiatric hospitals (2012).

METHOD

An online questionnaire was developed together with the working group for the prevention of violence and coercion in psychiatry and the regional association of psychiatry-experienced people in Baden-Wuerttemberg. The survey was conducted anonymously using the e-mail distribution lists of the psychiatric associations in Germany.

RESULTS

A total of 88 questionnaires from hospitals with obligatory responsibility for a catchment area (19.7% of those addressed) could be analyzed. Of these 99% used internal or external guidelines, 97.5% conducted de-escalation training, 23% participated in external benchmarking on the use of coercive measures. All hospitals used mechanical restraint, approximately 50% seclusion and physical restraint was practiced in 7%. Most, but not all hospital directors reported that mechanical restraint and seclusion were continuously (24/7) monitored. Changes in practice in the years to come were expected by the majority.

CONCLUSIONS

The survey revealed a high critical awareness concerning the use of coercive measures and the willingness to further change the practice.

The use of coercive interventions in mental health care in Germany and the Netherlands. A comparison of the developments in two neighboring countries

In this review, we compare the use of coercion in mental health care in Germany and in the Netherlands. Legal frameworks and published data on involuntary commitment, involuntary medication, seclusion, and restraint are highlighted as well as the role of guidelines, training, and attitudes held by psychiatrists and the public. Legal procedures regulating involuntary admission and commitment are rather similar, and so is the percentage of involuntary admissions and the rate per 100,000 inhabitants. However, opposing trends can be observed in the use of coercive interventions during treatment, which in both countries are considered as a last resort after all other alternative approaches have failed. In the Netherlands, for a long time seclusion has been considered as preferred intervention while the use of medication by force was widely disapproved as being unnecessarily invasive. However, after increasing evidence showed that number and duration of seclusions as well as the number of aggressive incidents per admission were considerably higher than in other European countries, attitudes changed within recent years. A national program with spending of 15 million € was launched to reduce the use of seclusion, while the use of medication was facilitated. A legislation is scheduled, which will allow also outpatient coercive treatment. In Germany, the latter was never legalized. While coercive treatment in Germany was rather common for involuntarily committed patients and mechanical restraint was preferred to seclusion in most hospital as a containment measure, the decisions of the Constitutional Court in 2011 had a high impact on legislation, attitudes, and clinical practice. Though since 2013 coercive medication is approvable again under strict conditions, it is now widely perceived as very invasive and last resort. There is evidence that this change of attitudes lead to a considerable increase of the use of seclusion and restraint for some patients.

Patients subject to high levels of coercion: staff's understanding

Measures to keep staff and patients safe (containment) frequently involve coercion. A small proportion of patients is subject to a large proportion of containment use. To reduce the use of containment, we need a better understanding of the circumstances in which it is used and the understandings of patients and staff. Two sweeps were made of all the wards, spread over four hospital sites, in one large London mental health organization to identify patients who had been subject to high levels of containment in the previous two weeks. Data were then extracted from their case notes about their past history, current problem behaviours, and how they were understood by the patients involved and the staff. Nurses and consultant psychiatrists were interviewed to supplement the information from the case records. Twenty-six heterogeneous patients were identified, with many ages, genders, diagnoses, and psychiatric specialities represented. The main problem behaviours giving rise to containment use were violence and self-harm. The roots of the problem behaviours were to be found in severe psychiatric symptoms, cognitive difficulties, personality traits, and the implementation of the internal structure of the ward by staff. Staff's range and depth of understandings was limited and did not include functional analysis, defence mechanisms, specific cognitive assessment, and other potential frameworks. There is a need for more in-depth assessment and understanding of patients' problems, which may lead to additional ways to reduce containment use.

Reduction in the use of seclusion by the methodical work approach

Patient care in a psychiatric setting can benefit from a more systematic, transparent, and goal-driven way of working. The methodical work approach, with its cyclic five phases, provides such an approach: (i) translation of problems into goals; (ii) search for means to realize the goals; (iii) formulation of an individualized plan; (iv) implementation of the plan; and (v) evaluation and readjustment. We examined the effect of the methodical work approach on the use of seclusion at a ward for the intensive treatment of inpatients with psychoses and substance-use disorders. The team of this ward implemented the methodical work approach. Special attention was paid to the involvement of the patient and his/her family in the treatment process and to the role of the coordinating nurse. Compared to control wards within the same hospital, at the ward where the methodical work approach was implemented, a more pronounced reduction was achieved in the number of incidents and in the total hours of seclusion. Implementation of the methodical work approach can contribute to a reduction in the use of seclusion.

Does experienced seclusion or restraint affect psychiatric patients' subjective quality of life at discharge?

Background

In Finland major effort has been invested in reducing the use of coercion in psychiatric treatment, and the goal is to diminish the use of coercion by 40% by 2015. Improving patients’ quality of life (QoL) has gained prominence in psychiatric treatment during the past decade. Numerous studies have shown that most secluded or restrained patients (S/R patients) would prefer not to have had this experience. Experience of S/R could affect negatively patients’ QoL, but empirical data on this issue are lacking.

Aim

The study aimed to explore the effect of experienced S/R on the subjective QoL of psychiatric in-patients.

Method

This study explored subjective QoL of the S/R patients. At discharge, S/R patients completed the Short Form of the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q-SF).

Results

We found that S/R patients’ (n = 36) subjective QoL was significantly better than that of non-S/R patients’ (n = 228). Most non-S/R patients were diagnosed with mood disorders (mostly depression). Most of S/R patients were diagnosed with schizophrenia, schizotypal and delusional disorders. The mean duration of S/R was 2.3 days, median was one day and mean length of the hospitalization after S/R episode was 2.5 months.

Conclusion

Our cross-sectional findings suggest that S/R does not considerably influence patients’ QoL or that the influence is short-lived. Because baseline QoL was not measured this remains uncertain. There are also many other factors, such as negative mood, which decrease the patients’ QoL ratings. These factors may either mask the influence of S/R on QoL or modify the experience of QoL to such an extent that no independent association can be found at the time of discharge.

Morbidity and mortality associated with the utilization of restraints : a review of literature

Use of physical restraints remains a highly controversial topic. Even with proven efficacy in restraint usage across multiple settings, for years, investigators have debated whether or not the risks outweigh the benefits. There is a growing concern regarding restraints-related negative consequences. Although over the past two decades, with new regulations, education and training, there has been a reduction in the prevalence of restraint episodes, morbidity and mortality are still disconcerting. Given this subject remains an issue today, a more up-to-date review of available literature is warranted. This article reviews the current literature surrounding the utilization of restraints that has been published over last 10 years with particular emphasis on restraints-related adverse outcomes. The vast amount of literature during the past decade demonstrates an increased awareness in potential dangers, as well as highlights new areas of research in restraint utilization. Despite the proliferation of studies, there continues to remain a lack of evidence from prospective studies that would elucidate the dangers from theory to practice.

Profiles of patients admitted to a psychiatric intensive care unit: secluded with or without restraint

OBJECTIVE

To identify and describe the profiles of patients admitted to a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU) as they relate to seclusion and restraint.

METHOD

Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and cluster analysis were performed with data for 114 patients admitted to a PICU from June 8, 2010, to June 7, 2011.

RESULTS

The MCA revealed that the presence or absence of seclusion and restraint was the main factor explaining the variance. Admitted patients fall into 5 profiles, 2 of which are significantly associated with seclusion and restraint: young psychotic men and women with bipolar disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

The differentiation of patient profiles as they relate to seclusion and restraint should lead to the development of profile-specific interventions before, during, and after seclusion and restraint.

Influence of patient characteristics on duration of seclusion/restrain in acute psychiatric settings in Japan

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the current state of duration of seclusion/restraint in acute psychiatric settings in Japan and the effect of patient characteristics on duration of seclusion/restraint.

METHODS

During an 8-month period starting from November 2008, duration of seclusion/restraint and patient characteristics were investigated in 694 psychiatric inpatients who experienced seclusion/restraint in three emergency and three acute wards at four psychiatric hospitals. Reasons for starting seclusion/restraint were also assessed. Analysis was performed using generalized linear models, with the duration of seclusion/restraint as the dependent variable and patient characteristics and reasons for starting seclusion/restraint as independent variables.

RESULTS

Of the patients secluded/restrained, 58.6% had a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia (F20-F29) and a large proportion (37.9%) were secluded/restrained due to hurting others. Median hours ofseclusion/restraint were 204 and 82 h, respectively. The duration of seclusion was longer for patients with F20-F29 than those with disorders due to psychoactive substance use (F10-F19) or other diagnoses (F40-F99), and when the reason was danger of hurting others. In contrast, the duration of restraint in female patients and in patients with F10-F19 diagnosis was shorter.

CONCLUSION

The duration of seclusion/restraint at acute psychiatric care wards in Japan are much longer than those reported by previous overseas studies. Although Japanese structure issues such as more patients per ward and a lower ratio of nurses need to be considered, skills for dealing with patients with primary diagnosis of F20-F29 secluded due to danger posed to others should be improved.

Improving seclusion practice: implications of a review of staff and patient views

This review explores patient and staff perceptions and improvement suggestions regarding seclusion in psychiatric inpatient settings. After an extensive literature search, 39 empirical papers were included in the review. According to the literature, patients perceived seclusion to be a distinct negative incident. Staff thought seclusion had a therapeutic effect and believed that units could not operate effectively without seclusion, but regretted that the situation was not resolved differently. Staff and patients had suggestions to improve the seclusion experience. Common themes in relation to the implications for practice are the need for better communication and more contact between patients and staff before, during and after the seclusion event.

Professionals' attitudes after a seclusion reduction program: anything changed?

Changing professionals' attitudes toward seclusion is seen as an important condition to reduce its use. The purpose of this study was to determine whether professionals from a mental health institute in the Netherlands changed in their attitudes toward seclusion after implementation of a multifaceted seclusion reduction program. Professionals working on four acute admission wards filled in the Professional Attitudes Toward Seclusion Questionnaire (PATS-Q) before and after a seclusion reduction program. Changes were analyzed by comparing mean scores on the PATS-Q. After the program, professionals scored significantly higher on 'ethics' and 'more care'. As expected, no change occurred on 'reasons' for the use of seclusion. In addition, no significant changes were found on 'confidence', 'better care' and 'other care'. Significant changes in professional attitudes concerning the ethics of using seclusion and involving issues of more care were observed after a seclusion reduction program. Mental health professionals moved in the direction of 'transformers', indicating an increased criticism of the practice of seclusion and increased willingness to change their own use of seclusion.

Differences in seclusion rates between admission wards: does patient compilation explain?

Comparison of seclusion figures between wards in Dutch psychiatric hospitals showed substantial differences in number and duration of seclusions. In the opinion of nurses and ward managers, these differences may predominantly be explained by differences in patient characteristics, as these are expected to have a large impact on these seclusion rates. Nurses assume more admissions of severely ill patients are related to higher seclusion rates. In order to test this hypothesis, we investigated differences in patient and background characteristics of 718 secluded patients over 5,097 admissions on 29 different admission wards over seven Dutch psychiatric hospitals. We performed an extreme group analysis to explore the relationship between patient and ward characteristics and the wards' number of seclusion hours per 1,000 admission hours. In a multivariate and a multilevel analysis, various characteristics turned out to be related to the number of seclusion hours per 1,000 admission hours as well as to the likelihood of a patient being secluded, confirming the nurses assumptions. The extreme group analysis showed that seclusion rates depended on both patient and ward characteristics. A multivariate and multilevel analyses revealed that differences in seclusion hours between wards could partially be explained by ward size next to patient characteristics. However, the largest deal of the difference between wards in seclusion rates could not be explained by characteristics measured in this study. We concluded ward policy and adequate staffing may, in particular on smaller wards, be key issues in reduction of seclusion.

Impact of the physical environment of psychiatric wards on the use of seclusion

BACKGROUND

The physical environment is presumed to have an effect on aggression and also on the use of seclusion on psychiatric wards. Multicentre studies that include a broad variety of design features found on psychiatric wards and that control for patient, staff and general ward characteristics are scarce.

AIMS

To explore the effect of design features on the risk of being secluded, the number of seclusion incidents and the time in seclusion, for patients admitted to locked wards for intensive psychiatric care.

METHOD

Data on the building quality and safety of psychiatric as well as forensic wards (n = 199) were combined with data on the frequency and type of coercive measures per admission (n = 23 868 admissions of n = 14 834 patients) on these wards, over a 12-month period. We used non-linear principal components analysis (CATPCA) to reduce the observed design features into a smaller number of uncorrelated principal components. Two-level multilevel (logistic) regression analyses were used to explore the relationship with seclusion. Admission was the first level in the analyses and ward was the second level.

RESULTS

Overall, 14 design features had a significant effect on the risk of being secluded during admission. The 'presence of an outdoor space', 'special safety measures' and a large 'number of patients in the building' increased the risk of being secluded. Design features such as more 'total private space per patient', a higher 'level of comfort' and greater 'visibility on the ward', decreased the risk of being secluded.

CONCLUSIONS

A number of design features had an effect on the use of seclusion and restraint. The study highlighted the need for a greater focus on the impact of the physical environment on patients, as, along with other interventions, this can reduce the need for seclusion and restraint.

Reducing seclusion through involuntary medication: a randomized clinical trial

The study evaluated whether seclusion and coercive incidents would be reduced in extent and number if involuntary medication was the first choice of intervention. Patients admitted to an acute psychiatric ward were randomly allocated to two groups. In Group 1, involuntary medication was the intervention of first choice for dealing with agitation and risk of violence. In Group 2, seclusion was the intervention of first choice. Patients' characteristics between the groups were compared by Pearson χ(2) and two-sample t-tests; the incidence rates and risk ratios (RRs) were calculated to examine differences in number and duration of coercive incidents. In Group 1, the relative risk of being secluded was lower than in Group 2, whereas the risk of receiving involuntary medication was higher. However, the mean duration of the seclusion incidents did not differ significantly between the two groups; neither did the total number of coercive incidents. Although the use of involuntary medication could successfully replace and reduce the number of seclusions, alternative interventions are needed to reduce the overall number and duration of coercive incidents. A new policy for managing acute aggression - such as involuntary medication - can be implemented effectively only if certain conditions are met.

The effects of a nationwide program to reduce seclusion in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

From 2006 to 2009, the Dutch government provided €5 m annually for a nationwide program to reduce seclusion in psychiatric hospitals by 10% a year. We aimed to establish whether the numbers of both seclusion and involuntary medication changed significantly after the start of this national program.

METHODS

Using Poisson regression to estimate difference in logit slopes, we analyzed data for 1998-2009 from the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate, retrospectively examining the national numbers of seclusion and involuntary medication before and after the start of the program.

RESULTS

The difference in slopes of the numbers of seclusion before and after the start of the program was statistically significant (difference 5.2%: p < 0.001). After the start of the program seclusions dropped 2.0% per year. Corrected for the increasing number of involuntary hospitalizations this figure was 4.7% per year. The difference in slopes of the numbers of involuntary medication did not change statistically significant (difference 0.5%, n.s.). After correction for the increasing number of involuntary hospitalizations the difference turned significant (difference 3.3%, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

After the start of the nationwide program the number of seclusions fell, and although significantly changing, the reduction was modest and failed to meet the objective of a 10% annual decrease. The number of involuntary medications did not change; instead, after correction for the number of involuntary hospitalizations, it increased.

Event sequencing of forced intramuscular medication in England

In most inpatient psychiatric care systems it is permissible in certain situations for staff to forcibly inject patients with psychotropic medication. The aim of this study is to describe what precedes and follows a coerced intramuscular injection within a nursing shift. Data were collected on the sequence of conflict (aggression, absconding, etc.) and containment (seclusion, restraint, etc.) for the first 2 weeks of 522 acute admissions on 84 wards in 31 UK hospitals. Injections were given to 9% of patients. Aggression, regular medication refusal and pro re nata (PRN) medication refusal preceded injections. The giving of coerced medication concluded most crises. Coerced medication effectively resolves crises in the short term. Staff should offer oral PRN as an alternative, unless this is unsafe. Where only verbal violence has occurred staff should try to resolve the crisis without enforcing medication. More research on the best way to respond to inpatients' medication refusal is required.

Coercion within Danish psychiatry compared with 10 other European countries

BACKGROUND

In 2008, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) criticized the use of mechanical restraint in Denmark and referred to it as ill-treatment. What do other European countries do better? To answer this question, we compared the use of coercive measures regarding psychiatric inpatients in Denmark and comparable European countries.

AIMS

Comparing coercive measures from Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Belgium, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Ireland, France and Italy.

METHODS

Review of international literature and a cross-sectional study performed as a questionnaire survey.

RESULTS

Denmark used more mechanical restraint and holding than Finland and Norway; however Sweden used twice as much as Denmark. Finland used more seclusion than did the other countries. Norway was the country that used the smallest amount of physical coercion. Only Norway, Finland, Sweden and Denmark had comparable representative data on coercion.

CONCLUSIONS

Norway used less physical restraint than Denmark. We could not find any obvious reasons for the differences in the use of physical restraint.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Comparing the factors surrounding coercion between countries may serve as a basis for minimizing coercion and carrying it out in the most acceptable manner for the patients, thereby providing better psychiatric treatment in Europe.

Nurses' decision on seclusion: patient characteristics, contextual factors and reflexivity in teams

While many characteristics of patients, professionals and facilities with relevance to seclusion rates have been investigated, their relative importance is unclear. Virtually no attention has been paid to team processes and reflexivity in relation to decision making on seclusion. The aim of this paper is to estimate the effects of these factors on nurse decision making on seclusion. Sixty Dutch psychiatric nurses of four closed wards reported team reflexivity and their tendency to seclude a theoretical patient. Approachability (whether there was a good or hardly any possibility to communicate with the patient), staffing level and confidence within the team had the greatest impact on the decision to seclude. Intra class correlation was 0.30. There was a large interaction effect of reflexivity with team 4, and team reflexivity was highly correlated with team tendency to avoid seclusion. In nurses' decision on seclusion, the effects of 'pure' patient characteristics are small as compared with the effects of interpersonal and contextual factors, and nurses vary widely in their judgement. Team reflexivity is related to the tendency to prevent seclusion.

Physical restraints in an Italian psychiatric ward: clinical reasons and staff organization problems

PURPOSE

To analyze physical restraint use in an Italian acute psychiatric ward, where mechanical restraint by belt is highly discouraged but allowed.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected from medical and nursing charts, from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2008. Physical restraint rate and relationships between restraints and selected variables were statistically analyzed.

FINDINGS

Restraints were statistically significantly more frequent in compulsory or voluntary admissions of patients with an altered state of consciousness, at night, to control aggressive behavior, and in patients with "Schizophrenia and other Psychotic Disorders" during the first 72 hr of hospitalization.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Analysis of clinical and organizational factors conditioning restraints may limit its use.

Methodological issues in monitoring the use of coercive measures

PURPOSE

In many European countries, initiatives have emerged to reduce the use of seclusion and restraint in psychiatric institutions. To study the effects of these initiatives at a national and international level, consensus on definitions of coercive measures, assessment methods and calculation procedures of these coercive measures are required. The aim of this article is to identify problems in defining and recording coercive measures. The study contributes to the development of consistent comparable measurements definitions and provides recommendations for meaningful data-analyses illustrating the relevance of the proposed framework.

METHODS

Relevant literature was reviewed to identify various definitions and calculation modalities used to measure coercive measures in psychiatric inpatient care. Figures on the coercive measures and epidemiological ratios were calculated in a standardized way. To illustrate how research in clinical practice on coercive measures can be conducted, data from a large multicenter study on seclusion patterns in the Netherlands were used.

RESULTS

Twelve Dutch mental health institutes serving a population of 6.57 million inhabitants provided their comprehensive coercion measure data sets. In total 37 hospitals and 227 wards containing 6812 beds were included in the study. Overall seclusion and restraint data in a sample of 31,594 admissions in 20,934 patients were analyzed. Considerable variation in ward and patient characteristics was identified in this study. The chance to be exposed to seclusion per capita inhabitants of the institute's catchment areas varied between 0.31 and 1.6 per 100.000. Between mental health institutions, the duration in seclusion hours per 1000 inpatient hours varied from less than 1 up to 18h. The number of seclusion incidents per 1000 admissions varied between 79 up to 745. The mean duration of seclusion incidents of nearly 184h may be seen as high in an international perspective.

CONCLUSION

Coercive measures can be reliably assessed in a standardized and comparable way under the condition of using clear joint definitions. Methodological consensus between researchers and mental health professionals on these definitions is necessary to allow comparisons of seclusion and restraint rates. The study contributes to the development of international standards on gathering coercion related data and the consistent calculation of relevant outcome parameters.

Prevalence and correlates of seclusion with or without restraint in a Canadian psychiatric hospital: a 2-year retrospective audit

Seclusion with or without restraint is a measure used to manage patients with challenging behaviours. Although controversial, the intervention remains poorly documented, especially in Canadian psychiatric hospitals. The purpose of this study is to assess the prevalence of the measure and identify any correlated demographic characteristics and psychiatric disorders. Episodes of seclusion with or without restraint were extracted from a computerized, hospital-based system introduced specifically to track such interventions. Of 2721 patients hospitalized during that time, 23.2% (n = 632) were secluded with or without restraint, and 17.5% (n = 476) were secluded with restraint. Younger age, schizophrenia or other psychosis, bipolar and personality disorder, and longer stay in hospital are predictors of an episode of seclusion with or without restraint. Younger age, bipolar and personality disorders and a longer stay in hospital are predictors of an episode of seclusion with restraint. For patients who spent longer in seclusion and under restraint, there is a positive association with longer stay in hospital. In this inpatient psychiatric facility, seclusion with or without restraint thus appears to be common. More research is warranted to better identify the principal factors associated with seclusion and restraint and help reduce resort to these measures.

Nursing practices recorded in reports of episodes of seclusion

The purpose of this study is to describe the nursing practices recorded in reports of patient episodes of seclusion, with or without restraints, in a specialized psychiatric facility in Quebec. The reports for all adult patients secluded (n = 4863) in a psychiatric unit between April 1, 2007 and March 31, 2009, were examined. Descriptive analyses were performed. The main reasons for seclusion were agitation, disorganization, and aggressive behaviour. The alternative methods that were attempted included stimulus reduction, extra medication, and working with the patient to find a solution. Few families were notified about their relation's seclusion. More hours of seclusion were reported in the evening and at night. Our results are comparable to those obtained by other investigators. Some of the variables have not been the subject of much research: for example, health conditions during seclusion with or without restraint and partnerships with family members. Our findings also suggest that, in their analyses, studies should differentiate between cognitive-impairment and adult-psychiatry units as well as long-term seclusion and short-term seclusion. The information reported by the nurse makes no distinction between short-stay and long-stay adult psychiatric units. Only one psychiatric facility was investigated in this study, precluding generalization.

The essence of psychiatric nursing: redefining nurses' identity through moral dialogue about reducing the use of coercion and restraint

In this article, we focus on core values of psychiatric nurses in relation to coercion and constraint. We analyze changes that took place in a project aiming at reducing coercion at a closed inpatient ward of a psychiatric hospital. Using the philosophy of Hans-Georg Gadamer and Margaret Urban Walker, we analyze both the process of moral changes through dialogue and the outcome in terms of new identities and moral responsibilities. We conclude that the project stimulated nurses to redefine their roles and develop a deeper intersubjective understanding of core values of their profession.

Incidence of seclusion and restraint in psychiatric hospitals: a literature review and survey of international trends

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify quantitative data on the use of seclusion and restraint in different countries and on initiatives to reduce these interventions.

METHODS

Combined literature review on initiatives to reduce seclusion and restraint, and epidemiological data on the frequency and means of use in the 21st century in different countries. Unpublished study was detected by contacting authors of conference presentations. Minimum requirements for the inclusion of data were reporting the incidence of coercive measures in complete hospital populations for defined periods and related to defined catchment areas.

RESULTS

There are initiatives to gather data and to develop new clinical practice in several countries. However, data on the use of seclusion and restraint are scarcely available so far. Data fulfilling the inclusion criteria could be detected from 12 different countries, covering single or multiple hospitals in most counties and complete national figures for two countries (Norway, Finland). Both mechanical restraint and seclusion are forbidden in some countries for ethical reasons. Available data suggest that there are huge differences in the percentage of patients subject to and the duration of coercive interventions between countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Databases on the use of seclusion and restraint should be established using comparable key indicators. Comparisons between countries and different practices can help to overcome prejudice and improve clinical practice.

The practice of seclusion and time-out on English acute psychiatric wards: the City-128 Study

BACKGROUND

Seclusion is widely used internationally to manage disturbed behavior by psychiatric patients, although many countries are seeking to reduce or eliminate this practice. Time-out has been little described and almost completely unstudied.

AIM AND METHOD

To assess the relationship of seclusion and time-out to conflict behaviors, the use of containment methods, service environment, physical environment, patient routines, staff characteristics, and staff group variables. Data from a multivariate cross-sectional study of 136 acute psychiatric wards in England were used to conduct this analysis.

RESULTS

Seclusion is used infrequently on English acute psychiatric wards (0.05 incidents per day), whereas time-out use was more frequent (0.31 incidents per day). Usage of seclusion was strongly associated with the availability of a seclusion room. Seclusion was associated with aggression, alcohol use, absconding, and medication refusal, whereas time-out was associated with these and other more minor conflict behaviors. Both were associated with the giving of "as required" medication, coerced intramuscular medication, and manual restraint. Relationships with exit security for the ward were also found.

CONCLUSIONS

Given its low usage rate, the scope for seclusion reduction in English acute psychiatry may be small. Seclusion reduction initiatives need to take a wider range of factors into account. Some substitution of seclusion with time-out may be possible, but a rigorous trial is required to establish this. The safety of intoxicated patients in seclusion requires more attention.

The reasons for using restraint and seclusion in psychiatric inpatient care: A nationwide 15-year study

BACKGROUND

The containment or the prevention of actual violence is the primary justification for the use of restraint and seclusion in psychiatry. The aim of the present study was to determine the grounds for using restraint and seclusion in clinical practice in Finland, and whether these reasons have changed over a 15-year period as a result of legislative changes.

METHOD

A structured postal survey concerning the reasons for restraint and seclusion was completed in all the Finnish psychiatric hospitals during a predetermined week in 1990, 1991, 1994, 1998 and 2004. The duration of the episode as well as demographic and clinical information on the restrained and secluded patient were also reported.

RESULTS

Agitation/disorientation was the most frequent reason for the use of restraint and seclusion. The duration of the restraint and seclusion episodes was not determined by the reason for using these measures. Some differences in the reasons were found among subgroups of patients.

CONCLUSION

Clinical practice deviates from the theoretical and legal grounds established for restraint and seclusion, and is too open to subjective assessment and interpretations.

Seclusion: the perspective of nurses

Knowledge of how nurses experience the process of secluding a patient can be useful in improving the quality of patient care and in the prevention of work related stress in nurses. This study describes personal experiences of nurses throughout the seclusion process. The emotions which came to surface in semi-structured interviews with 8 nurses were categorized in three main themes (Tension, Trust and Power) and a stress response curve was identified in the seclusion process, with specific feelings in each phase. Feelings denied in former studies such as feeling superior, anger and disgust were found in the interviews in this study.