Exploring the Safewards Programme to Reduce Restrictive Practices in Residential Aged Care: Protocol for a Pilot and Feasibility Study

INTRODUCTION

Restrictive practice use in residential aged care homes internationally is unacceptably high. Although policies and legislation mandate the reduction or elimination of restrictive practices, there remains a gap in knowledge regarding strategies that have been effective in achieving a sustained reduction in restraint use. There is an urgent need to identify effective and feasible interventions that aged care staff can implement in everyday practice to reduce restraint use. Safewards is an evidence-based programme that has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing conflict and restrictive practice use in inpatient psychiatric settings and has the potential to address the issue of restraint use in aged care homes. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of Safewards in reducing restrictive practices in residential aged care homes.

METHODS

This pilot and feasibility study will adopt a mixed methods process and outcomes evaluation. Safewards will be implemented in two Australian residential aged care homes. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework will be used to evaluate implementation outcomes. Additionally, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research will be used to guide qualitative data collection (including semi-structured interviews with residents/family members, aged care leaders and staff) and explain the facilitators and barriers to effective implementation.

CONCLUSION

This study will provide pilot evidence on the feasibility of the Safewards programme in residential aged care homes. Understanding the processes and adaptations for implementing and evaluating Safewards in residential aged care will inform a future trial in aged care to assess its effectiveness. More broadly, the findings will support the implementation of an international aged care policy of reducing restrictive practices in residential aged care.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A person with lived experience of caring for someone with dementia is employed as a Safewards facilitator and is a member of the steering committee. Residents and family members will be invited to participate in the project steering committee and provide feedback on their experience of Safewards.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12624000044527.

Implementation and use of the Safewards model in healthcare services: A scoping review

Safewards is a multi-intervention mental health nursing model of practice improvement aimed at preventing and reducing conflict and containment. The use of Safewards has now extended beyond mental health settings. Implementation of Safewards has been reported to be challenging and therefore requires an evidence-informed and structured approach. This review's objectives were to: (i) Comprehensively map approaches used to implement Safewards interventions; (ii) Characterise the outcomes measured in Safewards implementation studies; and (iii) Identify the facilitators and barriers to Safewards training and its implementation in practice. All quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods publications of Safewards, the interventions, evaluations, barriers and facilitators from all healthcare services internationally were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews were used to guide methodology. Data were reported according to the 12 items of the TIDieR. Twenty-seven publications reported the implementation of Safewards. Descriptions were limited for reporting items such as intervention descriptions, materials, resources, specific procedures and processes, modifications made to interventions and delivery of interventions and training. No consistent theoretical implementation framework was reported. Collaboration, leadership, feedback and co-design were strong drivers for staff buy-in, engagement and success for implementation in mental health and acute settings. Transparency, replicability and generalisation require a detailed description of all elements of an intervention being implemented. Without adequate information, only assumptions can be drawn about the clinical governance and process of the implementation and training, and it is difficult to conclude when attempting to replicate the interventions.

Safewards: An integrative review of the literature within inpatient and forensic mental health units

Mental health inpatient units are complex and challenging environments for care and treatment. Two imperatives in these settings are to minimize restrictive practices such as seclusion and restraint and to provide recovery-oriented care. Safewards is a model and a set of ten interventions aiming to improve safety by understanding the relationship between conflict and containment as a means of reducing restrictive practices. To date, the research into Safewards has largely focused on its impact on measures of restrictive practices with limited exploration of consumer perspectives. There is a need to review the current knowledge and understanding around Safewards and its impact on consumer safety. This paper describes a mixed-methods integrative literature review of Safewards within inpatient and forensic mental health units. The aim of this review was to synthesize the current knowledge and understanding about Safewards in terms of its implementation, acceptability, effectiveness and how it meets the needs of consumers. A systematic database search using Medline, CINAHL, Embase and PsychInfo databases was followed by screening and data extraction of findings from 19 articles. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of empirical articles, and the Johanna Brigg's Institute (JBI's) Narrative, Opinion, Text-Assessment and Review Instrument (NOTARI) was used to undertake a critical appraisal of discussion articles. A constant comparative approach was taken to analysing the data and six key categories were identified: training, implementation strategy, staff acceptability, fidelity, effectiveness and consumer perspectives. The success of implementing Safewards was variously determined by a measured reduction of restrictive practices and conflict events, high fidelity and staff acceptability. The results highlighted that Safewards can be effective in reducing containment and conflict within inpatient mental health and forensic mental health units, although this outcome varied across the literature. This review also revealed the limitations of fidelity measures and the importance of involving staff in the implementation. A major gap in the literature to date is the lack of consumer perspectives on the Safewards model, with only two papers to date focusing on the consumers point of view. This is an important area that requires more research to align the Safewards model with the consumer experience and improved recovery orientation.

Contextual Barriers and Enablers to Safewards Implementation in Victoria, Australia: Application of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

Background: Safewards is a complex psychosocial intervention designed to reduce conflict and containment on inpatient mental health units. There is mounting international evidence of the effectiveness and acceptability of Safewards. However, a significant challenge exists in promising interventions, such as Safewards, being translated into routine practice. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) provides a framework through which to understand implementation in complex health service environments. The aim was to inform more effective implementation of Safewards using the CFIR domains and constructs, capitalizing on developing an understanding of variations across wards. Method: Seven Safewards Leads completed the Training and Implementation Diary for 18 wards that opted in to a trial of Safewards. Fidelity Checklist scores were used to categorize low, medium and high implementers of Safewards at the end of the 12-week implementation period. Results: Qualitative data from the diaries were analyzed thematically and coded according to the five CFIR domains which included 39 constructs. Twenty-six constructs across the five domains were highlighted within the data to have acted as a barrier or enabler. Further analysis revealed that six constructs distinguished between low, medium, and high implementing wards. Discussion: Our findings suggest that for implementation of Safewards to succeed, particular attention needs to be paid to engagement of key staff including managers, making training a priority for all ward staff, adequate planning of the process of implementation and creating an environment on each inpatient unit that prioritize and enables Safewards interventions to be undertaken by staff regularly.

Absconding: A qualitative perspective of patients leaving inpatient psychiatric care

Absconding from inpatient psychiatric care is a complex problem with significant and broad ranging effects for patients, staff, family/carers, and the broader community. Absconding includes leaving the ward without permission and failing to return from leave at an agreed time. This study is a retrospective chart audit of a data set of absconding events from 11 psychiatric wards in a metropolitan Australian city. The data set included both quantitative and qualitative data. The focus of this study is analysis of the qualitative data documenting what happened during events, with quantitative data provided to contextualize the qualitative analysis. A total of 995 absconding events by 488 patients were reported between January 2016 and June 2018, representing a rate of 1.6 per 100 admissions. Two themes were identified in the qualitative analysis. 'Having things to do' encompassed opportunistic absconding and volitional absconding. 'Something changed' represented predisposing events that affected the absconding behaviour, such as being stepped down in care (moving from a more acute to a less acute psychiatric unit), receiving bad news, or interpersonal conflict either between patients or between nursing staff and patients. Results highlight the importance of harm minimization strategies to reduce the incidence of absconding.