An attributional study of seclusion and restraint of psychiatric patients.

University of Pennsylvania, School of Nursing, Philadelphia 19104-6096.
Archives of Psychiatric Nursing (Impact Factor: 1.03). 05/1994; 8(2):69-77. DOI: 10.1016/0883-9417(94)90036-1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This descriptive study used two attributional frameworks to examine the causes psychiatric inpatients and nurses gave for the seclusion and restraint of patients. Patients were interviewed in restraints. The reasons patients and nurses gave for the patients restraint were recorded verbatim. A nominal system using the recorded responses was developed by two attribution researchers and were also coded along the dimensions of locus, controllability, and stability. The findings supported attribution theory and research in that most patients and nurses gave causes for the patients' restraint. However, the data suggest more research is needed in this area.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Restrictive measures may have important physical and psychological consequences on all persons involved. The current study examined how these are perceived by persons with intellectual disabilities and staff. Interviews were conducted with eight persons with intellectual disabilities who experienced a restrictive measure and their care providers. They were queried on their understanding of the restrictive measure, its impact on the relationship, their emotions and alternative interventions. Restrictive measures were experienced negatively by persons with intellectual disabilities and their care providers. Service users reported feeling sad and angry, whereas staff mentioned feeling anxious. Moreover, persons with intellectual disabilities appeared to understand the goal of restrictive measures (e.g. ensuring their own and others' safety) and identified alternative interventions (e.g. speaking with a staff member or taking a walk). This study sheds further light on how persons with intellectual disabilities and staff experience the application of restrictive measures. Debriefing sessions with service users and staff may help minimize negative consequences.
    Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 08/2013; 27(5). DOI:10.1111/jar.12069 · 1.38 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Internationally, seclusion practices continue to be the subject of intense clinical health service and academic scrutiny. Despite extensive efforts to reduce and eliminate this controversial practice, seclusion remains a clinical intervention widely used in contemporary mental health service settings. Early identification of people who are at risk for seclusion and the timely application of alternative evidence-based interventions are critical for reducing incidents of seclusion in real-world practice settings. This retrospective study aimed to determine the relationship between sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and the use of seclusion for those mental health consumers for whom evidence-based seclusion-reduction initiatives had little impact. A 12-month centred moving average was fitted to seclusion data from a psychiatric inpatient unit over 2 years to determine stabilization in seclusion reduction. The number of consumers admitted was calculated from the point of stabilization for 1 year (n = 469). In this cohort, univariate analysis sought to compare the characteristics of those who were secluded and those who were not. A multivariate logistic regression model was undertaken to associate future seclusion based on significant independent variables. Of those people admitted, 88 (19%) were secluded. The majority of seclusions occurred in the first 5 days (70/88, 79%). Multivariate logistic regression indicated that three variables maintained their independent associative risk of seclusion: (i) age less than 35 years; (ii) assessment of risk of violence to others; and (iii) a history of seclusion. The implications of these findings for nursing practice are discussed.
    International journal of mental health nursing 07/2014; DOI:10.1111/inm.12078 · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite improvements in psychiatric inpatient care, patient restrictions in psychiatric hospitals are still in use. Studying perceptions among patients who have been secluded or physically restrained during their hospital stay is challenging. We sought to review the methodological and ethical challenges in qualitative and quantitative studies aiming to describe patients' perceptions of coercive measures, especially seclusion and physical restraints during their hospital stay.
    BMC Psychiatry 06/2014; 14(1):162. DOI:10.1186/1471-244X-14-162 · 2.24 Impact Factor