Interventions for reducing the use of seclusion in psychiatric facilities. Review of the literature

179Citations
Citations of this article
145Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The authors of a recent systematic review concluded that the use of non-pharmacological containment methods, excluding restraint and seclusion, was not supported by evidence. Their focus on randomised, controlled trials, however, does not reflect the research that has been, or could be, conducted. Aims: To find empirically supported interventions that allow reduction in the use of seclusion in psychiatric facilities. Method: We reviewed English-language, peer-reviewed literature on interventions that allow reduction in the use of seclusion. Results: Staff typically used multiple interventions, including state-level support, state policy and regulation changes, leadership, examinations of the practice contexts, staff integration, treatment plan improvement, increased staff to patient ratios, monitoring seclusion episodes, psychiatric emergency response teams, staff education, monitoring of patients, pharmacological interventions, treating patients as active participants in seclusion reduction interventions, changing the therapeutic environment, changing the facility environment, adopting a facility focus, and improving staff safety and welfare. Conclusions: Reducing seclusion rates is challenging and generally requires staff to implement several interventions.

References Powered by Scopus

Get full text
368Citations
119Readers
Get full text
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gaskin, C. J., Elsom, S. J., & Happell, B. (2007, October). Interventions for reducing the use of seclusion in psychiatric facilities. Review of the literature. British Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.106.034538

Readers over time

‘09‘10‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘2406121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 61

62%

Researcher 20

20%

Professor / Associate Prof. 12

12%

Lecturer / Post doc 5

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 49

48%

Psychology 29

28%

Nursing and Health Professions 15

15%

Social Sciences 9

9%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0