Coercion in psychiatry: the importance of extramural factors

Relationship of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics to mechanical restraint used in a psychiatric hospital in Spain

BACKGROUND

Coercive measures have been applied in mental health fields throughout history, denying people with mental illness the ability to decide, even though there is increasing evidence that these measures bring few benefits to these individuals.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to analyse the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics most likely associated with the use of mechanical restraints (MRs) in psychiatric hospital settings.

DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a descriptive, comparative and analytical cross-sectional study in people with mental disorders who were hospitalized in two hospitals in the Autonomous Valencian Community (Spain). We included a total of 91 participants who completed the Scale to Assess Unawareness of Mental Disorder (SUMD), Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Barrat's Impulsiveness Scale and the Hamilton Anxiety Scale.

RESULTS

The results we collected indicated that the patients most likely to be mechanically restrained were younger people with less awareness of their symptoms and disease, previous admissions to a psychiatric hospital and cohabitation with parents and/or family. In addition, having been admitted involuntarily, previously having had MRs applied, presenting more positive psychotic symptoms and habitual caffeine consumption all predicted the use of MRs.

CONCLUSIONS

The variables that were able to predict MR were involuntary admission, previous use of MR, the presence of positive psychotic symptoms and caffeine consumption.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Evaluation of the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients can help health professionals, especially nurses, to recognize patients who are at risk of requiring MR. This allows mental health practitioners to take these factors into account during interventions or when implementing programmes designed to reduce the use of coercive measures in psychiatric hospital settings.

IMPACT

What problem did the study address? Coercive measures have been applied in mental health fields throughout history, with no benefits to these patients. What were the main findings? There are studies that relate some variables to MR in psychiatric settings, but we have been able to find variables capable of predicting MR such as involuntary admission, previous use of MR, the presence of positive psychotic symptoms and caffeine consumption. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? The findings of this study allow for the reduction of MRs in psychiatric units. The sociodemographic and clinical characteristics found to be related to MR will help professionals identify when a patient is admitted in order to use specific interventions aimed at preventing the use of MRs during admission. This is the first study to indicate a relationship between caffeine consumption and the use of MRs. Further studies will be necessary to verify if controlled caffeine supplementation during admission to psychiatric units could become an additional strategy contributing to preventing the application of MR specifically in individuals who habitually consume coffee or caffeine-containing beverages daily.

REPORTING METHOD

We have adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines using the STROBE reporting method.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

Risk assessment for aggressive behaviour in schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Aggressive or violent behaviour is often associated with people with schizophrenia in common perceptions of the disease. Risk assessment methods have been used to identify and evaluate the behaviour of those individuals who are at the greatest risk of perpetrating aggression or violence or characterise the likelihood to commit acts. Although many different interventions have been developed to decrease aggressive or violent incidences in inpatient care, staff working in inpatient settings seek easy-to-use methods to decrease patient aggressive events. However, many of these are time-consuming, and they require intensive training for staff and patient monitoring. It has also been recognised in clinical practice that if staff monitor patients' behaviour in a structured manner, the monitoring itself may result in a reduction of aggressive/violent behaviour and incidents in psychiatric settings.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of structured aggression or violence risk assessment methods for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP, on 10 February 2021. We also inspected references of all identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing structured risk assessment methods added to standard professional care with standard professional care for the evaluation of aggressive or violent behaviour among people with schizophrenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently inspected citations, selected studies, extracted data, and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated a standard estimation of the risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) and its 95% CI. We assessed risk of bias in the included studies and created a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies in the review. The total number of participants was not identifiable, as some studies provided number of participants included, and some only patient days. The studies compared a package of structured assessment methods with a control group that included routine nursing care and drug therapy or unstructured psychiatric observations/treatment based on clinical judgement. In two studies, information about treatment in control care was not available. One study reported results for our primary outcome, clinically important change in aggressive/violent behaviour, measured by the rate of severe aggression events. There was likely a positive effect favouring structured risk assessment over standard professional care (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.85; 1 RCT; 1852 participants; corrected for cluster design: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.93; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial reported data for the use of coercive measures (seclusion room). Compared to standard professional care, structured risk assessment may have little or no effect on use of seclusion room as days (corrected for cluster design: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.07; N = 20; low-certainty evidence) or use of seclusion room as secluded participants (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.39 to 8.7; 1 RCT; N = 20; low-certainty evidence). However, seclusion room may be used less frequently in the standard professional care group compared to the structured risk assessment group (incidence) (corrected for cluster design: RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.47; 1 RCT; N = 20; substantial heterogeneity, Chi2 = 0.0; df = 0.0; P = 0.0; I2 = 100%; low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a clear effect on adverse events of escape (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.11; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence); fall down (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence); or choking (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.11; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence) when comparing structured risk assessment to standard professional care. There were no useable data for patient-related outcomes such as global state, acceptance of treatment, satisfaction with treatment, quality of life, service use, or costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, it is not possible to conclude that structured aggression or violence risk assessment methods are effective for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses. Future work should combine the use of interventions and structured risk assessment methods to prevent aggressive incidents in psychiatric inpatient settings.

Seclusion within the first 24 h following admission into inpatient mental health services and associations with referral pathways, recent service contact and HoNOS ratings

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Seclusion is a harmful and traumatising intervention for people accessing mental health services. People who are subject to seclusion in inpatient mental health services often first experience this within the first 24 h following admission. There is limited research examining how recent contact with services impacts the likelihood of seclusion when people are admitted to inpatient services. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Males, Māori and Pasifika experience higher rates of seclusion within the first 24 h following inpatient admission. People perceived by clinicians as overactive, aggressive, disruptive or agitated are seven times more likely to be secluded within the first 24 h. People referred from police or justice services are three times more likely to be secluded within the first 24 h. People who had frequent contact with community mental health services prior to inpatient admission were less likely to be secluded. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: The first 24 h of inpatient admission is a critical focus for eliminating the use of seclusion. Initial interactions with people recently admitted should focus on nurturing relationships and reducing distress. Mental health staff should consider the person's cultural needs, referral pathway, recent service contact and baseline ratings on the Health of the Nation Outcomes Scales (HoNOS) when working proactively to prevent the use of seclusion in the first 24 h following admission. Strengthening the focus on nurturing relationships, cultural understanding and non-coercive de-escalation approaches requires leadership support and strategic workforce development. ABSTRACT: Introduction People who experience seclusion in inpatient mental health services often do so within the first 24 h following admission. There is limited research examining the potential contributing factors, particularly recent contact with services. Aim/Question To identify factors associated with seclusion within the first 24 h following admission into acute inpatient mental health services. Method A retrospective analysis was undertaken using routinely collected data from Aotearoa New Zealand mental health services. Results A higher likelihood of seclusion within the first 24 h following admission was associated with: males, Māori, Pasifika, referrals from police/justice services, inpatient transfers, recent contact with crisis assessment teams and clinician perceptions of aggression, problematic substance use, cognitive problems and hallucinations or delusions. Recent contact with community mental health services was associated with a lower likelihood. Discussion People's cultural needs, referral pathway, recent service contact and HoNOS scores should be considered when working to prevent the use of seclusion in the first 24 h following admission. Implications for Practice The first 24 h following inpatient admission is a critical period for preventing the use of seclusion. Nurturing relationships, cultural understanding and use of non-coercive de-escalation approaches can support better outcomes for people recently admitted.

[Coercion in psychiatric hospitalizations in Chile: madness and suffering in the 21st century]

This article reflects on the problem of coercion in Chilean psychiatric hospitalizations from the perspective of users who participate in mental health treatment programs in the public healthcare system. Qualitative research from a hermeneutical epistemic approach was carried out between 2019 and 2020, which included 25 interviews with individuals of both sexes (15 men and 10 women) who had a psychiatric diagnosis. The purpose of this research was to analyze their narratives and critically reframe intervention practices implemented in psychiatric hospitalizations in Chile, which constitute an important space for public health in the country as well as the rights of people with mental health problems. One of the principal findings of the study was that coercive practices still persist in Chile, despite being detrimental to the recovery of mental health care users, representing a negative impact on the quality of life and citizen freedoms of individuals with mental health problems.

Predicting coercion during the course of psychiatric hospitalizations

BACKGROUND

Coercive measures (such as seclusion, mechanical restraint, and forced medication) during psychiatric inpatient treatment should be avoided whenever possible. Different interventions were already developed to reduce coercion, but for their effective application, it is crucial to know the risk factors of individuals and clinical situations that might be associated with coercion. Since the results of previous studies differ considerably the current study aims to fill this gap by evaluating the course of the exertion of coercion in detail.

METHODS

In this study, we analyzed clinical, procedural, and sociodemographic data from patients (n = 16,607 cases) who were treated as inpatients in Switzerland's largest psychiatric institution with 320 beds during the years 2017 to 2020. We used regression models to identify predictors for the exertion of coercion, the number of coercive measures during a treatment episode and time until exertion of the first and last coercive measure.

RESULTS

Coercive measures are mostly used during the first days of treatment. We identified clinical parameters such as manic or psychotic episodes to be the most relevant predictors for the exertion of coercion. Cases with those disorders also received coercion more often and earlier in their treatment course than other diagnostic groups. Other promoting factors for frequency and early application of coercion were involuntary admission and factors of chronicity and clinical severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowing the risk factors may help to target preventive strategies for those at highest risk. In particular, interventions should focus on the critical timeframe at the beginning of treatment.

Do improved structural surroundings reduce restrictive practices in psychiatry?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is sparse evidence that modern hospital architecture designed to prevent violence and self-harm can prevent restrictive practices (RP). We examine if the use of RPs was reduced by the structural change of relocating a 170-year-old psychiatric university hospital (UH) in Central Denmark Region (CDR) to a new modern purpose-built university hospital.

METHODS

The dataset includes all admissions (N = 19.567) and RPs (N = 13.965) in the self-contained CDR one year before and after the relocation of the UH. We compare RPs at the UH a year prior to and after relocation on November 16th (November 2017, November 2019) with RPs at the other psychiatric hospitals (RH) in CDR. We applied linear regression analysis to assess the development in the monthly frequency of RPs pre- and post-relocation and examine underlying trends.

RESULTS

At UH, RPs performed decreased from 4073 to 2585 after relocation, whereas they remained stable (from 3676 to 3631) at RH. Mechanical restraint and involuntary acute medication were aligned at both UH and RH. Using linear regression analysis, we found an overall significant decrease in the use of all restrictive practices at UH with an inclination of -9.1 observations (95% CI - 12.0; - 6.3 p < 0.0001) per month throughout the two-year follow-up. However, the decrease did not deviate significantly from the already downward trend observed one year before relocation. Similar analyses performed for RH showed a stable use of coercion.

CONCLUSION

The naturalistic features of the design preclude any definitive conclusion whether relocation to a new purpose-built psychiatric hospital decreased the RPs. However, we argue that improving the structural environment at the UH had a sustained effect on the already declining use of RPs, particularly mechanical restraint and involuntary acute medication.

Effects of Implementing the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability for Mechanical Restraint in a Forensic Male Population: A Stepped-Wedge, Cluster-Randomized Design

The assessment and formulation of the risk of violence and other unwanted behaviors at forensic psychiatric facilities have been attempted for decades. Structured professional judgment tools, such as the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START), are among the recent attempts to overcome the challenge of accomplishing these goals. This study examined the effect of implementing START in clinical practice for the most serious adverse events among the target group of severely mentally ill forensic psychiatric inpatients. Results were based on the use of mechanical restraints as an outcome. This study is a pragmatic, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized controlled trial and was conducted over 5 years. It included eight forensic psychiatric units. Fifty out of 156 patients who had a basic aggression score of more than 0 were included in the study. We found that the rate of mechanical restraint use within the START period were 82% [relative risk (RR) = 0.18], lower than those outside of the START period. Patients evaluated within the START period were also found to have a 36% (RR = 0.64) lower risk of having higher Brøset Violence Checklist scores than patients evaluated outside the START period. Previous studies on START have primarily focused on validation, the predictive capability of the assessment, and implementation. We were only able to identify one study that aimed to identify the benefits and outcomes of START in a forensic setting. This study showed a significant reduction in the chance for inpatients in a forensic psychiatric facility to become mechanically restrained during periods where the START was used as risk assessment.

Determinants of mechanical restraint in an acute psychiatric care unit

BACKGROUND

Despite numerous attempts to reduce the use of mechanical restraint (MR), this technique continues to be widely applied in many acute psychiatric care settings. In order to reduce MR, a better understanding of the variables associated with its use and duration in different clinical environments is essential.

AIM

To determine the proportion of patients subjected to MR and the duration thereof in two acute care psychiatric units; and to identify the variables associated with the use and duration of MR.

METHODS

Descriptive study of all patients admitted to the acute psychiatric units at the Parc de Salut Mar (Barcelona, Spain) in the year 2018. The number and percentage of patients subjected to MR, as well as the duration of each episode were assessed. The following data were also registered: sociodemographic characteristics, psychiatric diagnosis, and presence of cultural and/or language barriers. Multivariate analyses were performed to assess determinants of MR and its duration.

RESULTS

Of the 464 patients, 119 (25.6%) required MR, with a median of 16.4 h per MR. Two factors - a diagnosis of psychotic disorder [Odds ratios (OR) = 0.22; 95%CI: 0.06-0.62; P = 0.005] and the presence of a language barrier (OR = 2.13; 95%CI: 1.2-3.7; P = 0.007) - were associated with a significantly higher risk of MR. Male sex was associated with a longer duration of MR (B = -19.03; 95%CI: -38.06-0.008; P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The presence of a language barrier and a psychotic disorder diagnosis are associated with a significantly higher risk of MR. Furthermore, male sex is associated with a longer duration of MR. Individualized restraint protocols that include the required tools are necessary to ultimately limit the use of mechanical restraint.

Prevalence of the use of chemical restraint in the management of challenging behaviours associated with adult mental health conditions: A meta-synthesis

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: The use of chemical restraint in emergency situations is to control aggression or violence to protect consumers and staff and is to be used as a last resort when all other behavioural control alternatives have been exhausted. Chemical restraint involves the use of medication. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: This is the first paper to systematically review the prevalence of the use of chemical restraint. The use of chemical restraint is common across emergency departments and acute psychiatric inpatient units worldwide. Consumers who are restrained are also likely to receive chemical restraint. The studies reviewed demonstrate that there is a need for more standardized data collection so that clearer comparisons can be made between healthcare settings and countries. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Implications of practice include the need to report adverse events post-chemical restraint as these can deleteriously affect a person's physical health. Identification of and staff education about first-line management techniques before chemical restraint is administered are significant to reduce its use. ABSTRACT: Introduction Chemical restraint is used to manage uncontrolled aggression, agitation or violent behaviours of consumers with mental health disorders admitted to acute psychiatric or emergency settings. Aim This systematic review aimed to synthesize the international prevalence of chemical restraint for non-consenting adults. Method PsycINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE/PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched for peer-reviewed literature published between January 1996 and July 2018. This paper reports on data extracted from retrospective audits of chemical restraint practice. Results Forty-eight papers were included. The median prevalence of use of any restraint was 21.2% (25th% 8.0 to 75th% 36.3). Median prevalence of people who were chemically restrained, of all people restrained in any manner, was 43.1% (25th% 22.9% to 75th% 70.7%). Of all people admitted to facility(ies), the median prevalence of chemical restraint was 7.4% (25th% 2.7 to 75th% 17.6). There was no statistically significant difference in any prevalence measure considering healthcare setting or country. There was a significant decrease over the review period in the use of any restraint, including chemical restraint. Discussion and implications for practice This is the first known comprehensive meta-view of chemical restraint use worldwide, highlighting the need for standardized data collection to enable comparisons between healthcare settings and countries. Relevance statement There is an international imperative to reduce or eliminate the use of coercive practices, such as physical and chemical restraint, in mental health care. This study provides important information for mental health nursing by synthesizing the international prevalence of chemical restraint for non-consenting adults. This meta-view of the worldwide use of chemical restraint can inform ongoing efforts to reduce its use.

Race, History of Abuse, and Homelessness Are Associated With Forced Medication Administration During Psychiatric Inpatient Care

OBJECTIVE

Although previous research has suggested that racial disparities exist in the administration of forced medication (FM) in psychiatric inpatients, data remain scarce regarding other contributing variables. Therefore, this study examined sociodemographic and clinical variables associated with FM administration in psychiatric inpatients.

METHODS

Electronic medical records from 57,615 patients admitted to an academic psychiatric hospital between 2010 and 2018 were reviewed to identify patients who received FM. These records indicated that FM petitions were requested and approved for ∼6200 patients. Patients were excluded from the analysis if they met the following exclusion criteria: under 18 years of age, presence of intellectual/developmental disability, dementia, or other neurological condition, or primary diagnosis of a nonpsychiatric medical condition or a substance-induced mood or psychotic disorder. After data on those patients were excluded, the final sample included records from 2569 patients (4.5% of the total records) in which the administration of FM was petitioned for and approved. The FM group was compared with a control group of 2569 patients matched in terms of age, sex, and admission date (no-forced medication group; NFM) via propensity scoring matching. Group comparisons (FM vs. NFM group) examined sociodemographic factors (race, age, sex, living situation), clinical features (diagnosis, substance abuse, history of abuse), and outcomes (length of stay, readmission rate). Regression analyses examined the association between FM and sociodemographic, clinical, and outcome variables.

RESULTS

Compared with the NFM group, the FM group contained significantly more African Americans (P<0.001), homeless individuals (P<0.001), and individuals with histories of abuse (P<0.001). Having received FM was a significant predictor of a longer length of stay (P<0.001) and higher readmission rates (P<0.001).

DISCUSSION

These results suggest that FM is more likely to be instituted in psychiatric inpatients who are of a minority race (African American), are in a homeless living situation, and/or have a history of abuse. Moreover, FM may be associated with poorer clinical outcomes at least as measured by the length of stay and higher readmission rates. We discuss possible reasons for these results and the importance of culturally competent and trauma-focused care.

International research into 22 years of use of chemical restraint: An evidence overview

BACKGROUND

Chemical restraint (CR) (also known as rapid tranquilisation) is the forced (non-consenting) administration of medications to manage uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violence in people who are likely to cause harm to themselves or others. Our population of interest was adults with mental health disorders (with/without substance abuse). There has been a growing international movement over the past 22 years towards reducing/eliminating restrictive practices such as CR. It is appropriate to summarise the research that has been published over this time, identify trends and gaps in knowledge, and highlight areas for new research to inform practice.

AIMS

To undertake a comprehensive systematic search to identify, and describe, the volume and nature of primary international research into CR published since 1995.

METHODS

This paper reports the processes and overall findings of a systematic search for all available primary research on CR published between 1 January 1996 and 31 July 2018. It describes the current evidence base by hierarchy of evidence, country (ies) producing the research, CR definitions, study purpose, and outcome measures.

RESULTS

This review identified 311 relevant primary studies (21 RCTs; 46 non-controlled experimental or prospective observational studies; 77 cross-sectional studies; 69 retrospective studies; 67 opinion pieces, position or policy statements; and 31 qualitative studies). The USA, UK, and Australia contributed over half the research, whilst cross-country collaborations comprised 6% of it. The most common research settings comprised acute psychiatric wards (23.3%), general psychiatric wards (21.6%), and general hospital emergency departments (19.0%).

DISCUSSION

A key lesson learnt whilst compiling this database of research into CR was to ensure that all papers described non-consenting administration of medications to manage adults with uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violence. There were tensions in the literature between using effective CR without producing adverse events, and how to decide when CR was needed (compared with choosing non-chemical intervention for behavioural emergencies), respecting patients' dignity whilst safeguarding their safety, and preserving safe workplaces for staff, and care environments for other patients. The range of outcome measures suggests opportunities to standardise future research.

Prevalence, predictors, and patterns of mechanical restraint use for inpatients with dual diagnosis

PURPOSE

This study examined the prevalence, predictors, and patterns of mechanical restraint in an inpatient dual diagnosis population.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were longitudinally collected from patients affected by severe mental illness and comorbid substance abuse that were hospitalized in three large wards from 2006 to 2012.

FINDINGS

In a sample of 1698 hospitalizations, the use of mechanical restraint ranged between 1% and 4% per year. The diagnosis of schizophrenia (odds ratio [OR], 2.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-5.40), the use of stimulant substances (OR, 5.68; 95% CI, 2.78-11.59) and male sex (OR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.12-9.27) were associated with an increased risk of being exposed to mechanical restraint.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Specialized interventions targeting people at risk of mechanical restraint may further reduce the incidence of restraint and improve treatment outcomes.

Dual diagnosis and mechanical restraint - a register based study of 31,793 patients and 6562 episodes of mechanical restraint in the Capital region of Denmark from 2010-2014

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether patients with dual diagnosis have a higher risk of being mechanical restraint compared to patients with only psychiatric diagnoses.

METHODS

Data on all patients admitted to a psychiatric ward from 2010-2014 in the Capital Region of Denmark was linked with information from the register of coercive measures. Patients were based on diagnosis divided into six groups. The three main patient groups were: only psychiatric diagnosis defined as all ICD-10 F-diagnosis except F10-F19, dual diagnosis (co-occurrence of diagnoses of harmful use or dependency and psychiatric diagnoses) and only other substance use diagnosis (i.e. other than harmful use or dependency). The risk of mechanical restraint was investigated by analyzing all first-time admissions in the period using Cox-proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

In the crude rates patients with dual diagnosis were more often mechanically restrained compared to patients with only psychiatric diagnoses or only other substance use diagnoses. However, this was attenuated when the characteristics of patients were accounted for. Patients with only other substance related diagnoses had the highest risk of being mechanically restrained.

CONCLUSION

When preventing mechanical restraint, the focus should be on actual use of substances or withdrawal effects and not on the dual diagnoses patients in them-self.

The impact of modified mania assessment scale (MAS-M) implementation on the use of mechanical restraint in psychiatric units

BACKGROUND AND AIM

During recent years, there has been an increased focus on reducing use of mechanical restraint in psychiatric care. Studies show that implementing an assessment tool could potentially prevent or decrease the number of episodes of mechanical restraint. This study aims to examine the association between use of the Danish assessment tool for psychiatric inpatients diagnosed with mania (MAS-M) and mechanical restraint to highlight if number, type, and duration of restraint could be prevented or reduced by this procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

This historical cohort study included psychiatric inpatients diagnosed with bipolar disorder and hospitalized with symptoms of mania at the departments of affective disorders during the years 2012-2015. Logistic regression was used in the statistical analyses.

RESULT

A total of 218 patients were included, 74 of whom were scored with MAS-M. Thirty-five episodes of mechanical restraint were recorded. A crude OR of 1.58 (95% CI: 0.75-3.30) of the association was estimated. The study showed a tendency toward patients scored with MAS-M being more frequently restrained with both belt and straps, however, in shorter duration, compared to the control group.

CONCLUSION

This study reported relevant clinical information concerning staff's use of MAS-M, however, did not show a significant association between the use of MAS-M and mechanical restraint. Nevertheless, conflicting results about the impact of MAS-M on preventing and reducing these coercive measures have been highlighted, suggesting that more complex factors influence the use of mechanical restraint. No causal effect was examined thus further studies are needed.

Use of antipsychotics and benzodiazepines in connection to minimising coercion and mechanical restraint in a general psychiatric ward

BACKGROUND

Decrease in coercive measures can lead to increased exposure to antipsychotics and benzodiazepines. This is not desirable as these drugs are associated with harmful side effects and reduced life expectancy.

AIM

To quantify and compare the use of antipsychotic and anxiolytic medications in connection with the implementation of a programme to reduce coercion and restraint.

METHODS

Observational study in a general psychiatric ward comparing psychopharmacological treatment after implementation of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce coercion and mechanical restraint with a historical reference cohort from the same ward.

RESULTS

Data from 101 admissions after implementation of interventions were compared with data from 85 admissions in a historical reference cohort. Mean defined daily doses of antipsychotics, benzodiazepines or the total amount of both showed no difference before and after implementation of the programme. Standardised regression coefficients (β) from a mixed effects linear regression model, adjusted for age, gender, length of admission, involuntary admission and history of substance abuse showed that neither total dose of antipsychotics (adjusted β: .05, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.20 to 0.31), total dose of benzodiazepines (adjusted β: -.13, 95%CI: -.42 to 0.16) nor total amount of both drugs (adjusted β: .00, 95%CI: -.26 to 0.21) increased after implementation.

CONCLUSION

Decrease in coercive measures from 2013 to 2016 has not lead to significant increases in the use of antipsychotic medication or benzodiazepines. The interventions are useful in establishing restraint-free wards, and careful monitoring of the psychopharmacological treatment is important for patient safety.

Mechanical restraint and characteristics of patient, staff and shifts in a psychiatric ward

BACKGROUND

The use of coercion is a balance between depriving the patients' autonomy and dignity and preventing endangerment of the body or health of self or others. It is of importance to obtain more knowledge about mechanisms leading to mechanical restraint in the attempt of reducing it.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse for associations between incidence of mechanical restraint (MR) and staffing level, staff demographics, patient characteristics, type of shift (day/evening/night) and change of shifts.

METHOD

A naturalistic descriptive method was used to study cases of MR in a psychiatric ward. Data for each case of MR was obtained from an electronic reporting system. Care workers from each shift were identified using duty rosters. Analyses included binary logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

In 82% of the 114 cases of MR, the patient was diagnosed with personality disorders. In the multiple regression analysis, a significant association was found between the use of MR and the presence of male care workers on the ward (OR:1.44, 95% CI: 1.01-2.05; p = .04). Moreover, MR was associated with evening shifts, compared with day and night shifts (OR =1,29, 95% CI: 1.14-2.57, p = .01). Besides, months from January to December was associated with a decrease in MRs (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.83-0.94; p = 7.3 E-6). No significant associations were found between MR and staffing level or experience.

CONCLUSIONS

MR was associated with evening shifts, higher number of male care workers on duty and a decrease from January to December.

Use of mechanical and pharmacological restraint over an eight-year period and its relation to clinical factors

BACKGROUND

Use of restraint and finding the balance between security and ethics is a continuous dilemma in clinical psychiatry. In daily clinic and in planning health-care service, knowledge on the characteristics of restraint situations is necessary to optimize its use and avoid abuse.

METHODS

We describe characteristics in the use of pharmacological and mechanical restraint in psychiatric acute wards in a hospital in Middle Norway over an eight-year period. Data on all cases of mechanical and pharmacological restraint from 2004 to 2011 were retrospectively collected from hand-written protocols. Complementary information on the patients was obtained from the hospital patient administrative system.

RESULTS

Restraint in acute wards was used on 13 persons per 100,000 inhabitants annually. The percentage of admitted patients exposed to restraint was 1.7%, with a mean of 4.5 cases per exposed patient. Frequency per 100 admitted patients varied from 3.7 (in 2007) to 10 (in 2009). The majority of restraint cases concerned male patients under 50 years and with substance-abuse, psychotic, or affective disorders. Significantly more coercive means were used during daytime compared to night and morning. There was a significant increase in pharmacological coercion during spring and mechanical coercion during summer.

CONCLUSIONS

Restraint was used on 1.7% of admitted patients, representing 13 per 100,000 inhabitants per year. Use of restraint was higher during certain periods of the day and was associated with the patient's diagnosis, age, gender, and legal status of hospitalization. There was a marked variation over the years.

How patients' characteristics influence the use of coercive measures

BACKGROUND

Coercive measures are applied in psychiatry as a last resort to control self- and hetero-aggressive behaviors in situations where all other possible strategies have failed. For ethical and clinical reasons, the number of instances of coercion should be reduced as far as possible.

AIM

The aim of the study was to identify sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients that were associated with coercion during hospital treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study has a descriptive, longitudinal design, based on a 1 year prospective observation of patients admitted to a psychiatric hospital consisting of six inpatient psychiatric wards with a total of 236 beds.

RESULTS

In the 12-month period covered by the study, 1476 people (778 men and 698 women) were treated in the hospital; 226 of them (15%) were subjected to coercion on a total of 405 occasions. The most frequently implemented form of direct coercion was mechanical restraint. The following factors involved in the use of direct coercion were identified: Male gender, young age, mental disorders resulting from the abuse of psychoactive drugs, involuntary admission to the hospital and the use of direct coercion in the past.

CONCLUSION

Assessments of patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics can help clinicians recognize patients who are particularly at risk of being subjected to coercive measures.