Nursing - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemDesign features that reduce the use of seclusion and restraint in mental health facilities: a rapid systematic review(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2021-01-01)UNLABELLED: 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.
-
ItemConsumer recommendations for enhancing the Safewards model and interventions(WILEY, 2019-04-01)This paper critiques the Safewards model through the lens of lived experiences of psychiatric hospitalization, diagnosis of mental illness, and distress. Special focus is given to the model's tested 10 interventions and to five lesser known interventions, identifying the impact they can have on hospitalized consumers. We highlight the role and prevalence of trauma, as well as the need to prevent harm in hospital settings. We draw upon notions of hospital as a sanctuary for people and the importance of providing a safe ward. 'Sanctuary harm' and 'Sanctuary trauma' are thus defined, with emphasis placed on the Safewards interventions as means by which sanctuary can be achieved. Finally, the consumer-perspective authors propose expansions to the model, critiquing the defining literature and moving towards a consumer experience of safety that is beyond the model's original intention: to reduce seclusion and restraint practices. Throughout the paper, the term 'consumer' is used in this context to mean people who have experienced or are experiencing psychiatric inpatient care.
-
ItemAuthentic engagement: A conceptual model for welcoming diverse and challenging consumer and survivor views in mental health research, policy, and practice(WILEY, 2020-08-01)As involvement of consumers/survivors in planning, delivery, and evaluation of services has increased, expectations of authentic and effective engagement, versus tokenism, have also risen. Different factors contribute to, or detract from, authentic engagement. Writing from mental health consumer/survivor and nursing positioning, respectively, we aim to redress the common problem of including only a narrow range of views and voices. This paper introduces a conceptual model that supports leaders in research, clinical, service, and policy roles to understand the necessity of engaging with a broader spectrum of consumer/survivor views and voices. The model draws on published consumer/survivor materials, making explicit diverse experiences of treatment and care and identifying the subsequent rich consumer/survivor advocacy agendas. We propose that strong co-production is made possible by recognizing and welcoming consumer/survivor activist, facilitator, transformer, and humanizer contributions. The conceptual model forms the basis for a proposed qualitative validation project.
-
ItemAttitudes towards seclusion and restraint in mental health settings: findings from a large, community-based survey of consumers, carers and mental health professionals(CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS, 2017-10-01)AIMS: There are growing calls to reduce, and where possible eliminate, the use of seclusion and restraint in mental health settings, but the attitudes and beliefs of consumers, carers and mental health professionals towards these practices are not well understood. The aim of this study was to compare the attitudes of mental health service consumers, carers and mental health professionals towards seclusion and restraint in mental health settings. In particular, it aimed to explore beliefs regarding whether elimination of seclusion and restraint was desirable and possible. METHODS: In 2014, an online survey was developed and widely advertised in Australia via the National Mental Health Commission and through mental health networks. The survey adopted a mixed-methods design, including both quantitative and qualitative questions concerning participants' demographic details, the use of seclusion and restraint in practice and their views on strategies for reducing and eliminating these practices. RESULTS: In total 1150 survey responses were analysed. A large majority of participants believed that seclusion and restraint practices were likely to cause harm, breach human rights, compromise trust and potentially cause or trigger past trauma. Consumers were more likely than professionals to view these practices as harmful. The vast majority of participants believed that it was both desirable and feasible to eliminate mechanical restraint. Many participants, particularly professionals, believed that seclusion and some forms of restraint were likely to produce some benefits, including increasing consumer safety, increasing the safety of staff and others and setting behavioural boundaries. CONCLUSIONS: There was strong agreement across participant groups that the use of seclusion and restraint is harmful, breaches human rights and compromises the therapeutic relationship and trust between mental health service providers and those who experience these restrictive practices. However, some benefits were also identified, particularly by professionals. Participants had mixed views regarding the feasibility and desirability of eliminating these practices.
-
ItemTroubling 'insight': power and possibilities in mental health care(WILEY, 2006-08-01)This paper critiques the conventional concept of 'insight' within the mental status assessment, seeking to unseat its taken-for-granted definition and the status it has acquired in research and practice. Drawing on social theory, consumer perspective and interdisciplinary research, the paper focuses on the impact of 'thin' biomedical understandings of insight, in disqualifying and demoralizing persons subjected to assessment and at the same time creating punitive scrutineers out of well-intentioned practitioners. Nurses and their mental health colleagues are encouraged to reconsider their reliance on the concept of insight. We entertain the alternative idea that insight is a quality of perception that mental health practitioners can cultivate, to more deeply understand their work, culture and the self.