Exploring patterns of seclusion use in Australian mental health services

Methodological Issues in Measuring Restrictive Care Practices (Mechanical/physical restraint, Chemical restraint and Seclusion) in Adult Mental Health Inpatient Units: A Systematic Review of Recent Literature

AIMS

To identify and characterise the approaches and instruments used in recent literature to measure the prevalence of restrictive care practices in adult mental health inpatient units. Additionally, it sought to summarise the reported psychometric properties, including reliability and validity of these measures.

METHODS

A systematic review of recent litratures was conducted using Scopus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Embase databases to identify studies published from 1 January 2010 to 11 October 2023. A total of 128 studies measuring the use of restrictive care practices were included. Data on measurement methods were extracted from each study and summarised to compare how consistently these practices have been measured across studies and how authors consistently reported the reliability and validity of these measurment approaches. All findings were reported following the PRISMA 2020 checklist.

RESULTS

There were significant variations in how the prevalence of restrictive care practices was measured, and the reliability and validity of these measurements were unclear for most studies. Only 11 studies reported inter/intra-rater reliability. Key variations were observed in data sources utilised, how and by whom the data were collected, the timing and total duration of data collection during patient admission, how and by whom data were extracted from secondary sources, measurement instruments and the reported reliability and validity of measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Methodological inconsistencies about the measurements approaches of restricitve care practices would introduduce potential random and/or systematic biases on the reported data which may obscure the the true prevalance these practices. This hinder the ability to acurately assess the effectiveness of reduction strategies and understand the naturally occuring practices. Establishing a standardised set of reliable measures is crucial for enabling valid comparisons for the rates of restricitve car epractice use across settings and countries, which could enhance the ongoing monitoring and reduction of these practices.

RELEVANCE TO THE CLINICAL PRACTICE

The absence of standardised defintions and measurement approaches for restrictive care practices challenges the global effort to reduce their use. Without reliable and common measures, clinicians and researchers often face challenges in documening RCP incidents accurately, compromising efforts to improve care quality and support a recovery-oriented approach. Such measurment errors would mislead decission-maker which would furhter contribute to the inconsistency the the implementation of these practices.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD:42022335167; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/export_details_pdf.php.

Seclusion and mechanical restraint in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic: an increased use in mental health settings

Purpose

COVID-19 pandemic-related restrictions have significantly changed the environment and the delivery of direct care in all health services, including psychiatric hospitals. The aim of the study is two-fold: 1) to retrospectively assess the incidence of seclusion and mechanical restraint in a Quebec mental health hospital over 4 years; and 2) to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their incidence.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study based on medical records from a Quebec mental health hospital collected (a) from April 2016 to March 2019), (b) from April 2019 to March 2020 (pre-COVID onset), and (c) from April 2020 to March 2021 (post-COVID onset). Descriptive statistics, chi square tests, Mann-Kendall test and Welch's t-test were performed.

Results

Following several years during which the use of restrictive measures remained stable, we have noted a significant increase within the first year following the COVID-19 pandemic. This increase can be seen in the use of both seclusion and restraints, which have risen 205% and 170% respectively.

Conclusion

There are a multitude of factors associated with the incidence of seclusion and restraint that have the potential to be triggered during emergencies and global crisis situations, impacting in turn the rights of an already vulnerable population.

Seclusion within the first 24 h following admission into inpatient mental health services and associations with referral pathways, recent service contact and HoNOS ratings

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Seclusion is a harmful and traumatising intervention for people accessing mental health services. People who are subject to seclusion in inpatient mental health services often first experience this within the first 24 h following admission. There is limited research examining how recent contact with services impacts the likelihood of seclusion when people are admitted to inpatient services. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Males, Māori and Pasifika experience higher rates of seclusion within the first 24 h following inpatient admission. People perceived by clinicians as overactive, aggressive, disruptive or agitated are seven times more likely to be secluded within the first 24 h. People referred from police or justice services are three times more likely to be secluded within the first 24 h. People who had frequent contact with community mental health services prior to inpatient admission were less likely to be secluded. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: The first 24 h of inpatient admission is a critical focus for eliminating the use of seclusion. Initial interactions with people recently admitted should focus on nurturing relationships and reducing distress. Mental health staff should consider the person's cultural needs, referral pathway, recent service contact and baseline ratings on the Health of the Nation Outcomes Scales (HoNOS) when working proactively to prevent the use of seclusion in the first 24 h following admission. Strengthening the focus on nurturing relationships, cultural understanding and non-coercive de-escalation approaches requires leadership support and strategic workforce development. ABSTRACT: Introduction People who experience seclusion in inpatient mental health services often do so within the first 24 h following admission. There is limited research examining the potential contributing factors, particularly recent contact with services. Aim/Question To identify factors associated with seclusion within the first 24 h following admission into acute inpatient mental health services. Method A retrospective analysis was undertaken using routinely collected data from Aotearoa New Zealand mental health services. Results A higher likelihood of seclusion within the first 24 h following admission was associated with: males, Māori, Pasifika, referrals from police/justice services, inpatient transfers, recent contact with crisis assessment teams and clinician perceptions of aggression, problematic substance use, cognitive problems and hallucinations or delusions. Recent contact with community mental health services was associated with a lower likelihood. Discussion People's cultural needs, referral pathway, recent service contact and HoNOS scores should be considered when working to prevent the use of seclusion in the first 24 h following admission. Implications for Practice The first 24 h following inpatient admission is a critical period for preventing the use of seclusion. Nurturing relationships, cultural understanding and use of non-coercive de-escalation approaches can support better outcomes for people recently admitted.

Factors associated with prolonged episodes of mechanical restraint in mental health hospitalization units in Andalusia

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Risk factors associated with prolonged episodes of mechanical restraint and other coercive measures are understudied. There have been no studies of this phenomenon in the context of the Andalusian public health system. Knowledge about factors associated with prolonged episodes is essential to increase the understanding of this phenomenon and develop strategies to reduce its occurrence. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: In Andalusia, prolonged restraint is still frequent and varies depending on the unit. It is associated with less time since admission, male gender, diagnosis, reason for restraint and the shift on which it was initiated. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Interventions at the level of the units could be necessary to prevent prolonged episodes of mechanical restraint. The results suggest the need for stricter control during the shifts on which restraint starts, especially in the first days after the patient's admission. Preventive risk assessment considering clinical and sociodemographic risk factors could help to reduce prolonged restraint. ABSTRACT: Introduction Factors associated with prolonged episodes of mechanical restraint and other coercive interventions are not clearly established and have been not studied in Andalusia (Spain). Aim To study factors associated with prolonged episodes of mechanical restraint. Method We analysed retrospectively episodes of mechanical restraint (N = 6267, prolonged episode >9.5 hours) in all public mental health hospitalization units (N = 20, 535 beds) that offer health coverage for the autonomous community of Andalusia. The data came from clinical records. A multivariable mixed logistic regression was used. Results In Andalusia, prolonged restraint is still frequent and varies depending on the unit. It is associated with less time since admission, male gender, diagnosis, reason for restraint and the shift on which it was initiated. Discussion The results provide evidence that prolonged episodes largely depend on the unit where they occur and that stricter control and regulation are necessary to prevent prolonged episodes. Implications for practice Interventions at the level of the unit are necessary. Stricter control in the shifts during which there is more risk of prolonged restraint may be necessary, especially in the first days following admission.

Nursing staff composition and its influence on seclusion in an adult forensic mental health inpatient setting: The truth about numbers

INTRODUCTION

Research on the influence of nursing staff composition and use of seclusion in the forensic mental health inpatient settings is sparse. Nursing staff composition refers to staffing levels, roles, gender ratio and skill mix of the ward teams. Internationally, the rates of seclusion in some forensic mental health inpatient settings have increased over the past 10 years despite global efforts to reduce and eliminate its use.

AIM

To examine whether the use of seclusion in a forensic mental health inpatient setting can be attributed to staffing composition or to contextual factors such as day of the week, month or other clinical factors.

METHOD

Retrospective data collection was conducted using seclusion data, daily ward reports and staff rosters. Data were collected for all shifts in the hospital over a six-month period.

RESULTS

Three staffing variables were identified as having an influence on the use of seclusion: the number of registered nurses on duty, the presence of the shift coordinator and having a lead nurse on shift.

DISCUSSION

Senior nurse oversight and guidance are important factors in assisting staff to identify clinical deterioration and intervene early which may assist services reduce the use of seclusion.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

As staffing levels and composition are modifiable, the results of this study may assist nurse leaders to consider workforce improvements to reduce seclusion use.

Risk factors associated with use of coercive practices in adult mental health inpatients: A systematic review

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Coercive practices such as restraint (physically holding a person) or seclusion (containing a person in locked room) are frequently used in mental health care. How often and which specific practices are used is not consistent across different healthcare systems, hospitals or wards. Internationally, there is agreement on the need to monitor and reduce the use of coercive practices. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The reviewed evidence suggests a number of different factors affect a person's risk of experiencing coercive practices, while admitted to a mental health ward. However, there is currently not enough high-quality research evidence to say which factors are most important or how they work to influence the likelihood of a person experiencing coercive practice. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: When carrying out risk assessments, mental health professionals must take into account that a number of different factors are important and explore these with the patient. Care plans aimed at minimizing the use of coercive practices, such as restraint, must be personalized and developed with the individual. ABSTRACT: Introduction Coercive practices, such as physical restraint and seclusion, are a common feature of all mental healthcare systems. However, there is considerable variation in their use, concern about their iatrogenic potential and agreement internationally on the need to monitor and reduce their use. Aims To examine the evidence concerning risk factors associated with use of coercive practices in adults admitted to inpatient psychiatric services. Method A systematic review, consistent with PRIMSA guidelines, of four databases (PsychINFO, Medline, CINHAL and Embase). Peer-reviewed, English language articles from database inception to February 2020 were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Results Twenty studies met inclusion criteria. Risk factors examined in the studies organized around four categories: patient socio-demographic; patient clinical; staff; and organizational factors. Overall, methodological quality of papers was deemed weak, and there was insufficient evidence to support any singular risk factor. Discussion The reviewed evidence suggests risk of coercive practice in inpatient mental health settings is multifactorial. Further research to standardize concept definitions and elucidate the mechanisms behind variance in use is required. Implications for Practice Assessment of patients at risk of coercive practice must take a multifactorial approach.

Nurse and patient factors: Predicting seclusion in adolescent psychiatric units

PROBLEM

Seclusion is considered a necessity when alternatives have failed. There is a consensus that seclusion has no therapeutic benefit, which justifies efforts to reduce the practice. This study aimed to identify nurse and patient variables that are predictive of seclusion on a large adolescent inpatient unit.

METHODS

Nested case controls were used to compare 72 afternoon shifts on which seclusion occurred to 216 afternoon shifts on which no seclusion occurred, between 2010 and 2013, at an Adolescent Psychiatric Inpatient Unit.

FINDINGS

Increased seclusion was predicted by a lower nurse to patient ratio, more male nurses on shift, fewer female nurses on shift, the presence of agency/temporary nurses on shift, greater combined years of mental health experience, and lower total HoNOSCA behavior subscale score. Unique predictors that increased risk of seclusion included greater number of male nurses and the presence of agency/temporary nurses, while a greater number of female nurses decreased risk of seclusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses play a unique role in seclusion outcomes that are separate to patient-factors and act as both protective and risk factors for seclusion. Changes can be made to staffing to reduce seclusion and future research should investigate why these nurse-factors contribute to seclusion.

Identifying Direct Coercion in a High Risk Subgroup of Offender Patients With Schizophrenia via Machine Learning Algorithms

PURPOSE

This study aims to explore risk factors for direct coercive measures (seclusion, restraint, involuntary medication) in a high risk subpopulation of offender patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

METHODS

Five hundred sixty nine potential predictor variables were explored in terms of their predictive power for coercion/no coercion in a set of 131 (36.6%) offender patients who experienced coercion and 227 who did not, using machine learning analysis. The dataset was split (70/30%) applying variable filtering, machine learning model building, and selection embedded in nested resampling approach in one subset. The best model was then selected, and the most important variables extracted on the second data subset.

RESULTS

In the final model the following variables identified coercion with a balanced accuracy of 73.28% and a predictive power (area under the curve, AUC) of 0.8468: threat of violence, (actual) violence toward others, the application of direct coercive measures during past psychiatric inpatient treatments, the positive and negative syndrome scales (PANSS) poor impulse control, uncooperativeness, and hostility and the total PANSS-score at admission, prescription of haloperidol during inpatient treatment, the daily cumulative olanzapine equivalent antipsychotic dosage at discharge, and the legal prognosis estimated by a team of licensed forensic psychiatrists.

CONCLUSIONS

Results confirm prior findings, add detail on factors indicative for the use of direct coercion, and provide clarification on inconsistencies. Limitations, clinical relevance, and avenues for future research are discussed.

The Use of Restrictive Practices on Males Released from Prison and Entering Acute Mental Health Services: A Retrospective Cross-sectional Comparative Study

Little is understood about restrictive practices (seclusion, physical restraint, mechanical restraint) for those admitted to mental health services from prison. This study aimed to determine restrictive practices use on males admitted involuntarily from prison compared to those admitted from the community. A retrospective cross-sectional, comparative research design was used. Those admitted from prison were no more likely to experience restrictive practices; but were more likely to have a co-existing diagnosis of alcohol/substance use or personality disorder, in addition to a primary diagnosis of psychotic illness. The proportionate use of restrictive practices despite such complex presentations is potentially indicative of the clinical use of effective alternative management strategies.

Machine Learning: An Approach in Identifying Risk Factors for Coercion Compared to Binary Logistic Regression

Introduction: Although knowledge about negative effects of coercive measures in psychiatry exists, its prevalence is still high in clinical routine. This study aimed at define risk factors and test machine learning algorithms for their accuracy in the prediction of the risk to being subjected to coercive measures. Methods: In a sample of involuntarily hospitalized patients (n = 393) at the University Hospital of Psychiatry Zurich, we analyzed risk factors for the experience of coercion (n = 170 patients) using chi-square tests and Mann Whitney U tests. We trained machine learning algorithms [logistic regression, Supported Vector Machine (SVM), and decision trees] with these risk factors and tested obtained models for their accuracy via five-fold cross validation. To verify the results we compared them to binary logistic regression. Results: In a model with 8 risk-factors which were available at admission, the SVM algorithm identified 102 out of 170 patients, which had experienced coercion and 174 out of 223 patients without coercion (69% accuracy with 60% sensitivity and 78% specificity, AUC 0.74). In a model with 18 risk-factors, available after discharge, the logistic regression algorithm identified 121 out of 170 with and 176 out of 223 without coercion (75% accuracy, 71% sensitivity, and 79% specificity, AUC 0.82). Discussion: Incorporating both clinical and demographic variables can help to estimate the risk of experiencing coercion for psychiatric patients. This study could show that trained machine learning algorithms are comparable to binary logistic regression and can reach a good or even excellent area under the curve (AUC) in the prediction of the outcome coercion/no coercion when cross validation is used. Due to the better generalizability machine learning is a promising approach for further studies, especially when more variables are analyzed. More detailed knowledge about individual risk factors may help to prevent the occurrence of situations involving coercion.

Prolonged use of seclusion and mechanical restraint in mental health services: A statewide retrospective cohort study

Seclusion and mechanical restraint are restrictive interventions that should be used only as a last resort and for the shortest possible time, yet little is known about duration of use in the broader context. Adult area mental health services throughout Victoria, Australia, were asked to complete a report form for prolonged episodes of seclusion (>8 hours) and mechanical restraint (>1 hour). The present, retrospective cohort study aimed to understand the individual (age, sex, type of service, duration of intervention) and contextual factors associated with prolonged use of restrictive interventions. Contextual factors describing the reasons for prolonged use of the restrictive interventions were captured qualitatively, and then coded using content analysis. Median duration was compared across individual factors using Mann-Whitney U-tests. During 2014, 690 episodes of prolonged restrictive intervention involving 311 consumers were reported. Close to half (n = 320, 46%) involved mechanical restraint. Seclusion episodes (n = 370) were longer in forensic mental health services compared to adult area mental health services (median: 24 hours and 18 min vs 16 hours and 42 min, P < 0.001). Mechanical restraint episodes (n = 320) were shorter in forensic mental health services compared to adult area mental health services (median: 3 hours and 25 min vs 4 hours and 15 min, P = 0.008). Some consumers were subject to multiple episodes of prolonged seclusion (55/206, 27%) and/or prolonged mechanical restraint (31/131, 24%). The most commonly occurring contextual factor for prolonged restrictive interventions was 'risk of harm to others'. Means for reducing the use of prolonged restrictive interventions are discussed in light of the findings.

Who experiences seclusion? An examination of demographics and duration in a public acute inpatient mental health service

Restrictive interventions such as seclusion may occur during an acute mental health crisis. Such interventions are experienced by people as traumatic and counter to recovery. The current study aimed to investigate the use of seclusion and who was secluded amongst patients presenting with psychotic symptomology. All acute inpatient admissions were examined across a 12-month period January-December 2013. Electronic and paper records were accessed and audited for all 655 admissions. There were 91 admissions that included a seclusion and 200 seclusion events. There were 79 unique patients who experienced seclusion. For those experiencing seclusion: two-thirds were male, 49% were either homeless or had no fixed abode, 32% received case management in the community prior to their inpatient stay, and 56% were unemployed or not in the workforce. The median and mode duration of seclusion was 4 h. By understanding seclusion interventions better, changes can be made to enhance practice. This descriptive research into seclusion has clarified the demographics of who is most likely to experience seclusion, for how long, and the implications for reducing restrictive interventions. How the social work role could contribute to reforms to protect and enhance the rights and well-being of marginalized members of our communities, at their most vulnerable, is considered.

Six years of national mental health seclusion data: the Australian experience

OBJECTIVES

Reducing or eliminating seclusion from mental health care settings has been a national priority for Australia since 2005. This paper describes Australia's national seclusion data collection, and summarises changes in seclusion rates in Australian public mental health services.

METHODS

Seclusion events per 1000 patient days were calculated from 2009-2010 to 2014-2015 utilising state and territory administrative data sources. Combined national data were used to calculate results for a number of service characteristics, such as target population and location of the service.

RESULTS

The rate of seclusion events decreased by 43% over the 6 years. Child and adolescent services reported consistently higher rates of seclusion, but a shorter duration of seclusion episodes, compared with other service types. There is high variation in seclusion rates between individual services (range 0.0-53.0 seclusion events per 1000 bed days in 2014-2015).

CONCLUSIONS

Seclusion event rates in Australia's specialised public acute mental health hospital services are declining. The use of existing administrative data was instrumental in establishing a national data source to facilitate the monitoring and reporting of progress of seclusion reduction strategies.

One-year incidence and prevalence of seclusion: Dutch findings in an international perspective

BACKGROUND

The Netherlands started a nationwide coercion reduction program in 2007. In 2011, accurate registration of coercive measures became obligatory by law.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare number and duration of coercive measures in the Netherlands with international data.

METHODS

2011 data on coercive measures were collected, using a system developed in Germany. To understand determinants of coercion, multilevel logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

12.0 % (n = 5169) of patients (n = 42.960) in 2011 experienced at least one coercive measure. Exposure to coercion was comparable to other countries, and duration was higher. Medication use seemed to half average times in seclusion. In the Netherlands, coercion mainly constituted of seclusion and occurred in bipolar and psychotic disorders. In Germany, coercion was mostly mechanical restraint and occurred in organic disorders and schizophrenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Gathering comprehensive data allows comparisons between countries, increasing our understanding of the impact of different cultures, legislation and health care systems on coercion. In the Netherlands, seclusion is still the main type of coercion, despite significant improvements in the last few years. It is shorter when applied in combination with enforced medication.

Investigation of Seclusion in one of the Psychiatric Wards in Razi Teaching Hospital of Tabriz

Seclusion is one of the methods in controlling violent behavior of inpatients in psychiatric wards. In current descriptive analytic study, data collection instrument included the seclusion list of inpatients by considering individual, social and clinical characteristics in one of the psychiatry wards In the Razi teaching hospital of Tabriz in the first six months of 2012. Among 264 admitted patients, 24 patients (9.1%) had been secluded and a total of 29 isolated incidents were recorded. Most of secluded incidents occurred on weekdays (75.9%), first week of inpatient (87.7%), and during the evening shifts (48.3%). The results obtained in this study demonstrate that in 55.2% cases, the duration of isolation was two hours and the most common cause of seclusion was aggressive behaviors. Most of secluded patients (66.7%) were diagnosed with mood disorders.

When reduction strategies are put in place and mental health consumers are still secluded: an analysis of clinical and sociodemographic characteristics

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.

Measuring the impacts of seclusion on psychiatry inpatients and the effectiveness of a pilot single-session post-seclusion counselling intervention

Despite the accumulation of evidence demonstrating patients' accounts of trauma associated with seclusion, the use of evidence-based post-seclusion debriefing is not apparent in the published work. This study aimed to identify the impacts seclusion has on an individual using the Impact of Events - Revised (IES-R), a standardized and widely used measure of trauma symptoms, and measure the effectiveness of a post-seclusion counselling intervention in mitigating the experience of seclusion-related trauma and reducing time spent in seclusion. The study design involved a comparison of the seclusion-related trauma and time in seclusion that was experienced by consenting patients managed on the two inpatient wards of Alfred Psychiatry. To investigate the efficacy of post-seclusion counselling to reduce event-related trauma as well as the use of seclusion, a brief single-session intervention was piloted comparing outcomes for patients treated on a ward implementing semistructured post-seclusion counselling and patients treated on a ward continuing with post-seclusion support as usual. A total of 31 patients consented to participate, with approximately 47% reporting trauma symptoms consistent with 'probable post-traumatic stress disorder' (IES-R total score, >33), although there was no difference in trauma experience between groups. Significantly fewer hours were spent in seclusion for patients treated on the ward piloting the post-seclusion counselling intervention. Findings, therefore, highlight not only the potential for significant trauma stemming from a seclusion event, but also the capacity for the implementation of such interventions as post-seclusion counselling to raise awareness of the need to minimize time spent in seclusion for patients.