Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
ItemDesign features that reduce the use of seclusion and restraint in mental health facilities: a rapid systematic reviewOostermeijer, S ; Brasier, C ; Harvey, C ; Hamilton, B ; Roper, C ; Martel, A ; Fletcher, J ; Brophy, L (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2021-01-01)Increasing efforts are being made to prevent and/or eliminate the use of seclusion and restraint in mental health facilities. Recent literature recognises the importance of the physical environment in supporting better outcomes in mental health services. This rapid review scoped the existing literature studying what physical design features of mental health facilities can reduce the use of seclusion and physical restraint. DESIGN: A rapid review of peer-reviewed literature. METHODS: Peer-reviewed literature was searched for studies on architectural design and the use of restraint and seclusion in mental health facilities. The following academic databases were searched: Cochrane Library, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus and Avery for English language literature published between January 2010 and August 2019. The Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tool was used to assess the quality of included studies. RESULTS: We identified 35 peer-reviewed studies. The findings revealed several overarching themes in design efforts to reduce the use of seclusion and restraint: a beneficial physical environment (eg, access to gardens or recreational facilities); sensory or comfort rooms; and private, uncrowded and calm spaces. The critical appraisal indicated that the overall quality of studies was low, as such the findings should be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSION: This study found preliminary evidence that the physical environment has a role in supporting the reduction in the use of seclusion and restraint. This is likely to be achieved through a multilayered approach, founded on good design features and building towards specific design features which may reduce occurrences of seclusion and restraint. Future designs should include consumers in a codesign process to maximise the potential for change and innovation that is genuinely guided by the insights of lived experience expertise.
ItemWorking towards least restrictive environments in acute mental health wards in the context of locked door policy and practiceFletcher, J ; Hamilton, B ; Kinner, S ; Sutherland, G ; King, K ; Tellez, JJ ; Harvey, C ; Brophy, L (WILEY, 2019-04-01)There has been a shift towards provision of mental health care in community-based settings in Australia. However, hospitals continue to care for people in acute mental health wards. An increasing proportion of the people in wards are admitted involuntarily, subject to restrictions of movement to minimize risk of harm to self and others. In response to concerns about the safety of people absconding from care, Queensland Health introduced a policy requiring all acute mental health wards in the State to be locked. In response, the Queensland Mental Health Commission funded a project to understand the impact of this policy and develop evidence-based recommendations regarding provision of least restrictive, recovery-oriented practices in acute wards. Facilitated forums were conducted with 35 purposively selected participants who identified as consumers, carers, or staff of acute mental health hospital wards, to test the acceptability, feasibility, and face validity of a set of evidence-informed recommendations for providing least restrictive, recovery-oriented practices. Participant responses were recorded, and data were analysed through an inductive, thematic approach. A recovery-oriented approach was supported by all stakeholders. Reducing boredom and increasing availability of peer support workers were considered key to achieving this. Focusing less on risk aversion was reported as central to enabling true Recovery Orientation. This project enabled recognition of the perspectives of consumers, carers, and staff in the consideration of evidence-informed recommendations that could be implemented to provide least restrictive care in the context of locked doors.
ItemPrevention and Recovery Care Services in Australia: Describing the Role and Function of Sub-Acute Recovery-Based Residential Mental Health Services in VictoriaFletcher, J ; Brophy, L ; Killaspy, H ; Ennals, P ; Hamilton, B ; Collister, L ; Hall, T ; Harvey, C (FRONTIERS MEDIA SA, 2019-10-24)Background: Prevention and Recovery Care (PARC) services are relatively new sub-acute residential services that have supported people with mental ill-health in Victoria since 2003. Operated from a partnership model between non-governmental agencies and clinical mental health services, PARC services integrate intensive recovery-focused psychosocial input with clinical mental health care. Aim: To describe and contrast the 19 PARC services operating in Victoria at the time of the study, in terms of structures and function, resources, and content and quality of care. Method: Nineteen participants, one representing each PARC, completed two surveys: the first, a purpose-designed survey relating to the government guidelines for PARC services, and the second, the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care. Results: Descriptive analyses highlighted that PARC services have operated in inner-city, urban, and regional areas of Victoria, from between 1 and 14 years. Participants reported that a recovery approach was at the core of service delivery, with a vast array of group and individual programs on offer. Across the state, there was variation in the quality of services according to the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care domains. Conclusions: This study has identified that there is variation in the structure and function, resourcing, and content and quality of care offered across Victoria's PARC services even though, in the main, they are guided by government guidelines. Hence it appears that the services adapt to local needs and changes in service systems occurring over time. The findings indicate emerging evidence that PARCs are providing recovery-oriented services, which offer consumers autonomy and social inclusion, and therefore likely enable a positive consumer experience. The range of individual and group programs is in line with the Victorian guidelines, offering practical assistance, therapeutic activities, and socialization opportunities consistent with consumer preferences. Further research into implementation processes and their impacts on quality of care is warranted concerning this and similar service models.