Lepping Peter, Masood Barkat, Flammer Erich, Noorthoorn Eric O
Centre for Mental Health and Society, Wrexham Academic Unit, Bangor University, Croesnewydd Road, Wrexham, LL13 7YP, UK.
Consultant Psychiatrist, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, North Wales, UK.
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2016 Sep;51(9):1301-9. doi: 10.1007/s00127-016-1203-x. Epub 2016 May 4.
Previous studies comparing restraint data from different countries had to rely on randomly published data and showed wide variance in the prevalence of restraint between countries.
To systematically compare datasets from four similar European countries with regard to restraint prevalence.
We analysed whole country or area datasets on restraint from Wales, Ireland, Germany and the Netherlands systematically, thus excluding selection, patient and setting bias. Learning disability (LD) and forensic settings were analysed separately. Differences in proportions between countries were tested by means of Chi square, with number of admissions, admission days and catchment area as denominator and counts of restraint as numerators.
Full datasets were obtained allowing calculations of total admissions, total restraint numbers, numbers of patients involved and total occupied bed days. Data for Ireland is from 2012 and from 2013 for the other three countries. The percentage of patients exposed to restraint varies between 4.5 and 9.4 %. The average number of restraints per patient is stable at around 3 in all countries. Patient numbers affected by restraint per 100 occupied bed days per month vary between 0.095 and 0.200. The Netherlands have the highest use of seclusion (79 %), the longest restraint times and low use of enforced medication. Wales the lowest use of seclusion (2 %), followed by Ireland (29 %) and Germany (49 %). Events per 100 admissions per month vary between 17 and 21. Patients affected by restraint per 100 admissions per month vary between 5.4 and 7.5. LD services account for a disproportionately high number of restraint events.
Patient related restraint data are remarkably similar between countries. Type and length of restraint still vary significantly.
以往比较不同国家约束数据的研究不得不依赖随机发表的数据,结果显示各国之间约束发生率差异很大。
系统比较四个欧洲相似国家关于约束发生率的数据集。
我们系统分析了来自威尔士、爱尔兰、德国和荷兰的全国或地区性约束数据集,从而排除了选择、患者和环境偏差。分别分析了学习障碍(LD)和法医环境。通过卡方检验各国之间比例的差异,以入院人数、入院天数和服务区域为分母,约束次数为分子。
获得了完整的数据集,从而能够计算总入院人数、总约束次数、涉及的患者人数和总占用床日数。爱尔兰的数据来自2012年,其他三个国家的数据来自2013年。受到约束的患者百分比在4.5%至9.4%之间变化。所有国家中每位患者的平均约束次数稳定在3次左右。每月每100个占用床日受约束的患者人数在0.095至0.200之间变化。荷兰隔离使用最多(79%),约束时间最长,强制用药使用较少。威尔士隔离使用最少(2%),其次是爱尔兰(29%)和德国(49%)。每月每100次入院的事件数在17至21之间变化。每月每100次入院受约束的患者数在5.4至7.5之间变化。学习障碍服务中的约束事件数量占比过高。
各国之间与患者相关的约束数据非常相似。约束的类型和时长仍有显著差异。