When reduction strategies are put in place and mental health consumers are still secluded: an analysis of clinical and sociodemographic characteristics

What do we know about the experience of seclusion in a forensic setting? An integrative literature review

Seclusion is used in forensic and general mental health settings to protect a person or others from harm. However, seclusion can result in trauma-related harm and re-traumatization with little known about the experience of seclusion for consumers in forensic mental health settings from their perspectives. This article explores consumer experiences of seclusion in forensic mental health settings and explores the differences between female and male experiences of seclusion. Five electronic databases were systematically searched using keywords and variations of experience, attitude, seclusion, coercion, forensic mental health, and forensic psychiatry. Inclusion criteria were original peer-reviewed studies conducted in adult forensic mental health settings reporting data on the experiences of or attitudes towards seclusion. Seven studies met the criteria for inclusion and a quality assessment was undertaken. Results found consumers in forensic mental health settings perceive seclusion to be harmful, a punishment for their behaviour, and largely a negative experience that impacts their emotional health. Some consumers report positive experiences of seclusion. Differences in the experience of seclusion for females and males are unclear. Further research is required to understand the experience of seclusion for women in forensic mental health settings. Identification and consideration of differences in the experience of seclusion for males and females may assist in identifying sex-specific interventions and may inform policy and practices to eliminate or reduce the trauma associated with seclusion use.

Relationship between nurses' use of verbal de-escalation and mechanical restraint in acute inpatient mental health care: a retrospective study

Although the use of verbal de-escalation in nursing has been shown to be an effective tool for controlling agitation and avoiding mechanical restraint, there is scarce evidence supporting the use of de-escalation by nurses and factors related to the patients who ultimately receive mechanical restraint. This retrospective study sought to examine the relationship between the use of verbal de-escalation by nurses and the clinical profile of patients who had received mechanical restraint at an acute mental health unit. This study analysed the records of patients who had received mechanical restraint between the years 2012 and 2019. A bivariate analysis was initially performed, followed by multiple logistic regression analysis. A total of 493 episodes of restraint were recorded. Of these, in almost 40% of cases, no prior use of verbal de-escalation was noted. The factors associated with the use of verbal de-escalation by nurses were patients with a history of restraint episodes and patients who previously had been administered medication. Furthermore, episodes of mechanical restraint that occurred later during the admission were also associated with the use of de-escalation. These findings confirm the relevance of early nurse interventions. Consequently, it is important to establish an adequate therapeutic relationship from the start of hospitalization to facilitate getting to know the patient and to enable the timely use of verbal de-escalation, thus avoiding the use of mechanical restraint.

Influence of nursing staff characteristics on seclusion in acute mental health care-A prospective two-year follow-up study

INTRODUCTION

Seclusion still occurs on mental health wards, despite absence of therapeutic efficacy and high risks of adverse patient effects. Literature on the effect of nursing teams, and the role of psychological characteristics in particular, on frequency of seclusion is scarce.

AIM

To explore the influence of demographic, professional or psychological, nursing team-level, and shift characteristics on the frequency of use of seclusion.

METHODS

Prospective two-year follow-up study.

RESULTS

We found that the probability of seclusion was lower when nursing teams with at least 75% males were on duty, compared to female only teams, odds ratio (OR = 0.283; 95% CrI 0.046-0.811). We observed a trend indicating that teams scoring higher on the openness personality dimension secluded less, (OR = 0.636; 95% CrI 0.292-1.156).

DISCUSSION

Higher proportions of male nurses in teams on duty were associated with lower likelihood of seclusion. We found an indication that teams with a higher mean openness personality trait tended to seclude less. These findings, if causal, could serve as an incentive to reflect on staff mix if circumstances demand better prevention of seclusion.

'Only ever as a last resort': Mental health nurses' experiences of restrictive practices

Nurses play a crucial role in the implementation of restrictive practices such as seclusion and restraint. Restrictive practices have been widely recognized as harmful practices and efforts to reduce their use have been in place for several years. While some reductions have been achieved, more information and insight into the perspectives and experiences of front-line mental health nursing staff is required if further changes are to be realized. Sixty-five respondents participated in an online survey to investigate Australian mental health nurses' personal experiences and opinions regarding restrictive practices. Analysis revealed restrictive practices as a complex, contested and challenging area of practice. Analysis of data revealed five main ways that restrictive practices were framed by respondents. These were as follows: as a response to fear; to maintain safety for all; a legacy of time and place; the last resort; and, a powerful source of occupational distress. In addition, findings revealed the need to support staff involved in restrictive practices. This need could be satisfied through the implementation of procedures to address post-restrictive distress at all levels of the organization. Ensuring an optimal work environment that includes appropriate staffing, availability of supportive education and structured routine debriefing of all episodes of restrictive practice is critical in achieving further reductions in seclusion and restraint.

Seclusion: A Patient Perspective

The appropriate treatment of mentally unwell, aggressive patients has challenged psychiatry for centuries. Seclusion is practiced worldwide, but concerns remain regarding its appropriateness and lack of alternatives. Patients generally report seclusion as a negative experience, though there is a paucity of literature exploring this in detail. This investigation was a service evaluation appraising inpatients' perspective of processes occurring before (information, communication), during (review, care), and after (debrief, reflection) seclusion in a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU). In this phenomenological study, qualitative data were gathered using a questionnaire in a structured interview. All patients had been nursed in seclusion during admission to a male PICU at South London and the Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust. Ten patients were interviewed over 4 months. The central theme was perceived lack of communication in the patient-professional relationship, which manifested itself as (i) violence against patients, (ii) lack of psychological support, and (iii) the need for alternatives. Such feedback from patients queries whether national guidelines are appropriate and/or being adhered to. Healthcare practitioners have a responsibility to challenge accepted practice to continually improve the standard of patient-centred care. Utilising patient perspectives can be a powerful driver of change towards more humane treatment of vulnerable patients.

The Use of Restrictive Practices on Males Released from Prison and Entering Acute Mental Health Services: A Retrospective Cross-sectional Comparative Study

Little is understood about restrictive practices (seclusion, physical restraint, mechanical restraint) for those admitted to mental health services from prison. This study aimed to determine restrictive practices use on males admitted involuntarily from prison compared to those admitted from the community. A retrospective cross-sectional, comparative research design was used. Those admitted from prison were no more likely to experience restrictive practices; but were more likely to have a co-existing diagnosis of alcohol/substance use or personality disorder, in addition to a primary diagnosis of psychotic illness. The proportionate use of restrictive practices despite such complex presentations is potentially indicative of the clinical use of effective alternative management strategies.

Assessment of Risk for Seclusion Among Forensic Inpatients: Validation and Modification of the Risk of Administrative Segregation Tool (RAST)

Seclusion is used in psychiatric care to protect patients and staff or to manage aggression but may have adverse effects. The ability to identify at-risk patients could help reduce seclusion. This study tested the Risk of Administrative Segregation Tool's (RAST) ability to predict any seclusions among 229 male forensic inpatients followed for up to 1 year of hospitalization, and days spent secluded, controlling for length of stay. RAST scores were lower than in correctional samples. The RAST did not predict seclusions in Year 1, but modification of three items to fit the forensic population (RAST-F) offered a small improvement. Among 62 patients hospitalized for more than 1 year, the RAST significantly predicted seclusions in Year 2, and the modifications improved prediction. The present modest findings support the RAST's potential to help identify patients most in need of clinical efforts to avert seclusion. Replication in larger samples, including female patients, is needed.

Perceptions of nurses working with psychiatric consumers regarding the elimination of seclusion and restraint in psychiatric inpatient settings and emergency departments: An Australian survey

Seclusion and restraint continue to be used across psychiatric inpatient and emergency settings, despite calls for elimination and demonstrated efficacy of reduction initiatives. This study investigated nurses' perceptions regarding reducing and eliminating the use of these containment methods with psychiatric consumers. Nurses (n = 512) across Australia completed an online survey examining their views on the possibility of elimination of seclusion, physical restraint, and mechanical restraint as well as perceptions of these practices and factors influencing their use. Nurses reported working in units where physical restraint, seclusion, and, to a lesser extent, mechanical restraint were used. These were viewed as necessary last resort methods to maintain staff and consumer safety, and nurses tended to disagree that containment methods could be eliminated from practice. Seclusion was considered significantly more favourably than mechanical restraint with the elimination of mechanical restraint seen as more of a possibility than seclusion or physical restraint. Respondents accepted that use of these methods was deleterious to relationships with consumers. They also felt that containment use was a function of a lack of resources. Factors perceived to reduce the likelihood of seclusion/restraint included empathy and rapport between staff and consumers and utilizing trauma-informed care principles. Nurses were faced with threatening situations and felt only moderately safe at work, but believed they were able to use their clinical skills to maintain safety. The study suggests that initiatives at multiple levels are needed to help nurses to maintain safety and move towards realizing directives to reduce and, where possible, eliminate restraint use.

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.

Fear and blame in mental health nurses' accounts of restrictive practices: Implications for the elimination of seclusion and restraint

Restrictive practices continue to be used in mental health care despite increasing recognition of their harms and an international effort to reduce and ultimately eliminate their use. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore mental health nurses' views of the potential elimination of these practices. Nine focus groups were conducted with 44 mental health nurses across Australia, and the data analysed using thematic analysis. Overall, the nurses expressed significant fear about the potential elimination of restrictive practices and saw themselves as being blamed for both the use of these practices and the consequences should they be eliminated. Findings detail the conflicts facing staff in balancing the need for ward safety for everyone present while at the same time providing person-centred care. Nurses described the changing role of the mental health nurse in acute settings, being more focussed on risk assessment and medication while at the same time attempting to practise in trauma-informed person-centred ways. The impact on ward safety with increasing acuity of consumers plus the presence of forensic consumers and those affected by methamphetamine was emphasized. Change initiatives need to take into account nurses' deep concerns about the consequences of eliminating all forms of control measures in hospitals and respond to the symptoms and behaviours consumers present with and associated unpredictable and concerning behaviours. Attempts to eliminate restrictive practices should, therefore, be carefully considered and come with a clear articulation of alternatives to ensure the safety of consumers, visitors, and staff.

Prolonged use of seclusion and mechanical restraint in mental health services: A statewide retrospective cohort study

Seclusion and mechanical restraint are restrictive interventions that should be used only as a last resort and for the shortest possible time, yet little is known about duration of use in the broader context. Adult area mental health services throughout Victoria, Australia, were asked to complete a report form for prolonged episodes of seclusion (>8 hours) and mechanical restraint (>1 hour). The present, retrospective cohort study aimed to understand the individual (age, sex, type of service, duration of intervention) and contextual factors associated with prolonged use of restrictive interventions. Contextual factors describing the reasons for prolonged use of the restrictive interventions were captured qualitatively, and then coded using content analysis. Median duration was compared across individual factors using Mann-Whitney U-tests. During 2014, 690 episodes of prolonged restrictive intervention involving 311 consumers were reported. Close to half (n = 320, 46%) involved mechanical restraint. Seclusion episodes (n = 370) were longer in forensic mental health services compared to adult area mental health services (median: 24 hours and 18 min vs 16 hours and 42 min, P < 0.001). Mechanical restraint episodes (n = 320) were shorter in forensic mental health services compared to adult area mental health services (median: 3 hours and 25 min vs 4 hours and 15 min, P = 0.008). Some consumers were subject to multiple episodes of prolonged seclusion (55/206, 27%) and/or prolonged mechanical restraint (31/131, 24%). The most commonly occurring contextual factor for prolonged restrictive interventions was 'risk of harm to others'. Means for reducing the use of prolonged restrictive interventions are discussed in light of the findings.

Six years of national mental health seclusion data: the Australian experience

OBJECTIVES

Reducing or eliminating seclusion from mental health care settings has been a national priority for Australia since 2005. This paper describes Australia's national seclusion data collection, and summarises changes in seclusion rates in Australian public mental health services.

METHODS

Seclusion events per 1000 patient days were calculated from 2009-2010 to 2014-2015 utilising state and territory administrative data sources. Combined national data were used to calculate results for a number of service characteristics, such as target population and location of the service.

RESULTS

The rate of seclusion events decreased by 43% over the 6 years. Child and adolescent services reported consistently higher rates of seclusion, but a shorter duration of seclusion episodes, compared with other service types. There is high variation in seclusion rates between individual services (range 0.0-53.0 seclusion events per 1000 bed days in 2014-2015).

CONCLUSIONS

Seclusion event rates in Australia's specialised public acute mental health hospital services are declining. The use of existing administrative data was instrumental in establishing a national data source to facilitate the monitoring and reporting of progress of seclusion reduction strategies.

Safety in psychiatric inpatient care: The impact of risk management culture on mental health nursing practice

The discourse of safety has informed the care of individuals with mental illness through institutionalization and into modern psychiatric nursing practices. Confinement arose from safety: out of both societal stigma and fear for public safety, as well as benevolently paternalistic aims to protect individuals from self‐harm. In this paper, we argue that within current psychiatric inpatient environments, safety is maintained as the predominant value, and risk management is the cornerstone of nursing care. Practices that accord with this value are legitimized and perpetuated through the safety discourse, despite evidence refuting their efficacy, and patient perspectives demonstrating harm. To illustrate this growing concern in mental health nursing care, we provide four exemplars of risk management strategies utilized in psychiatric inpatient settings: close observations, seclusion, door locking and defensive nursing practice. The use of these strategies demonstrates the necessity to shift perspectives on safety and risk in nursing care. We suggest that to re‐centre meaningful support and treatment of clients, nurses should provide individualized, flexible care that incorporates safety measures while also fundamentally re‐evaluating the risk management culture that gives rise to and legitimizes harmful practices.

Association of methamphetamine use and restrictive interventions in an acute adult inpatient mental health unit: A retrospective cohort study

The aim of the present study was to describe incidences of restrictive interventions and the association of methamphetamine use at an acute adult inpatient mental health unit in metropolitan Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. A total of 232 consecutive consumer admissions to the inpatient unit across a 3-month period were described for illicit substance use and the use of restrictive interventions (seclusion, mechanical restraint, and physical restraint) prior to and during admission. Of all admissions, 25 (10.8%) involved consumers subjected to a restrictive intervention. Methamphetamine use was either self-reported or detected by saliva test for 71 (30.6%) consumers. Following multivariate analyses, methamphetamine use (odds ratio (OR): 7.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.33-26.31) and restrictive intervention in the emergency department prior to admission (OR: 8.85, 95% CI: 2.83-27.70) were significant independent predictors of the use of restrictive interventions after inpatient admission. Anecdotal observations provided by clinical mental health staff that consumers intoxicated with methamphetamine appear to require restrictive intervention more frequently than other consumers was confirmed with the results of the current study. As the state of Victoria in Australia is on a pathway to the elimination of the use of restrictive interventions in mental health services, clinicians need to develop management strategies that provide specialist mental health care using the least-restrictive interventions. Although 26.8% of methamphetamine users were secluded after admission, restrictive interventions should not be the default management strategy for consumers who present with self-report or positive screen for methamphetamine use.