Article

Under the gaze of staff: special observation as surveillance.

Institute of Psychiatry, Kings College, London, UK.
Perspectives In Psychiatric Care (Impact Factor: 1.04). 01/2012; 48(1):2-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6163.2010.00299.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study explores the relationship of special observation (SO) to a range of patient, staff, and ward variables.
End-of-shift reports were completed by nurses on 136 acute mental health wards in England during 2004 and 2005.
Intermittent SO (patient checked at specified intervals) was used five times more frequently than constant SO (patient kept within sight or reach). Significant relationships were found between SO and measures of ward surveillance, door locking, and the ease of observing patients on the wards. Both types of SO were more common when higher numbers of staff without a nursing qualification were on duty.
Improved ward design, less reliance on unqualified staff, and greater use of surveillance measures may reduce the need for SO.

3 Bookmarks
 · 
127 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: Attainment of safe, calm inpatient psychiatric wards that are conducive to positive therapeutic care is crucial. On such wards, rates of coerced medication, seclusion, manual restraint and other types of containment are comparatively low, and, usually, rates of conflict-for example, aggression, substance use, and absconding-are also low. Sometimes, however, wards maintain low rates of containment even when conflict rates are high. This study investigated wards with the counterintuitive combination of low containment and high conflict or high containment and low conflict. METHODS: The authors conducted a secondary analysis of cross-sectional data collected from 136 acute psychiatric wards across England in 2004-2005. The wards were categorized into four groups on the basis of median splits of containment and conflict rates: high conflict and high containment, high conflict and low containment, low conflict and low containment, and low conflict and high containment. Features significantly associated with these ward types were identified. RESULTS: Among the variables significantly associated with the various typologies, some-for example, environmental quality-were changeable, and others-such as social deprivation of the area served-were fixed. High-conflict, low-containment wards had higher rates of male staff and lower-quality environments than other wards. Low-conflict, high-containment wards had higher numbers of beds. High-conflict, high-containment wards utilized more temporary staff as well as more unqualified staff. No overall differences were associated with low-conflict, low-containment wards. CONCLUSIONS: Wards can make positive changes to achieve a low-containment, nonpunitive culture, even when rates of patient conflict are high.
    Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 02/2013; 64(5). DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.201200328 · 2.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nursing of suicidal in-patients is a complex and responsible task. A direct and immediate intensive caring and therapeutic supervision, also known as special observation is still recommended in guidelines (DGPPN, 2012) and maybe one of the most used interventions in the caring of suicidal patients in inpatient settings. It involves many kinds to develop the relationship between the observer and the patient. The original SPOC was developed in Sweden with the aim to increase the quality of a systematically documentation during the supervision of suicidal patients. It is an instrument to ensure systematic documentation of observational behavior or noticeable mood during acute suicidal crisis, for example feelings like "worried, anxious" or other possible influencing factors like "sudden mood variation". By this means the SPOC can ensure the process of systematic documentation of special observation and increase its quality, i. e. who documented what at what time. Furthermore SPOC can facilitate a better communication of the observation process to the multidisciplinary team and to the patient as well. The SPOC includes the 28 items and covers 24 separate observation periods. The aim of this paper is to constitute the translation process from the English to the German SPOC version. The translation process followed a five step model. In the first step the English version was translated from two German native speakers. In the second step, the first two translation results where discussed by the Expertgroup (authors) and a new version was developed. In the third step the first german version was translated back (two English native Speakers) into English. The fourth step was taken, to review the results by the expertgroups (authors) and set up the so called "pre version". The last step includes the proof of content validity by 52 nurses. The proof was able to identify a few misunderstandings and helped to enhance the tool in its final version. With the translation, the German-speaking nursing practice in psychiatry has a tool that can be used by psychiatric nurses regarding their complex interventions to be undertaken in this special group of patients.
    Pflege 12/2013; 26(6):401-10. DOI:10.1024/1012-5302/a000328 · 0.47 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the previous paper we described a model explaining differences in rates of conflict and containment between wards, grouping causal factors into six domains: the staff team, the physical environment, outside hospital, the patient community, patient characteristics and the regulatory framework. This paper reviews and evaluates the evidence for the model from previously published research. The model is supported, but the evidence is not very strong. More research using more rigorous methods is required in order to confirm or improve this model. In a previous paper, we described a proposed model explaining differences in rates of conflict (aggression, absconding, self-harm, etc.) and containment (seclusion, special observation, manual restraint, etc.). The Safewards Model identified six originating domains as sources of conflict and containment: the patient community, patient characteristics, the regulatory framework, the staff team, the physical environment, and outside hospital. In this paper, we assemble the evidence underpinning the inclusion of these six domains, drawing upon a wide ranging review of the literature across all conflict and containment items; our own programme of research; and reasoned thinking. There is good evidence that the six domains are important in conflict and containment generation. Specific claims about single items within those domains are more difficult to support with convincing evidence, although the weight of evidence does vary between items and between different types of conflict behaviour or containment method. The Safewards Model is supported by the evidence, but that evidence is not particularly strong. There is a dearth of rigorous outcome studies and trials in this area, and an excess of descriptive studies. The model allows the generation of a number of different interventions in order to reduce rates of conflict and containment, and properly conducted trials are now needed to test its validity.
    Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing 01/2014; 21(4). DOI:10.1111/jpm.12085 · 0.80 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
97 Downloads
Available from
May 31, 2014