Hammervold Unn Elisabeth, Norvoll Reidun, Aas Randi W, Sagvaag Hildegunn
Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, NO-4036, Stavanger, Norway.
Work Research Institute, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Apr 23;19(1):235. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4060-y.
Use of physical restraint is a common practice in mental healthcare, but is controversial due to risk of physical and psychological harm to patients and creating ethical dilemmas for care providers. Post-incident review (PIR), that involve patient and care providers after restraints, have been deployed to prevent harm and to reduce restraint use. However, this intervention has an unclear scientific knowledge base. Thus, the aim of this scoping review was to explore the current knowledge of PIR and to assess to what extent PIR can minimize restraint-related use and harm, support care providers in handling professional and ethical dilemmas, and improve the quality of care in mental healthcare.
Systematic searches in the MEDLINE, PsychInfo, Cinahl, Sociological Abstracts and Web of Science databases were carried out. The search terms were derived from the population, intervention and settings.
Twelve studies were included, six quantitative, four qualitative and two mixed methods. The studies were from Sweden, United Kingdom, Canada and United States. The studies' design and quality varied, and PIR s' were conducted differently. Five studies explored PIR s' as a separate intervention after restraint use, in the other studies, PIR s' were described as one of several components in restraint reduction programs. Outcomes seemed promising, but no significant outcome were related to using PIR alone. Patients and care providers reported PIR to: 1) be an opportunity to review restraint events, they would not have had otherwise, and 2) promote patients' personal recovery processes, and 3) stimulate professional reflection on organizational development and care.
Scientific literature directly addressing PIR s' after restraint use is lacking. However, results indicate that PIR may contribute to more professional and ethical practice regarding restraint promotion and the way restraint is executed. The practice of PIR varied, so a specific manual cannot be recommended. More research on PIR use and consequences is needed, especially PIR's potential to contribute to restraint prevention in mental healthcare.
身体约束的使用在精神卫生保健中很常见,但由于对患者存在身体和心理伤害风险以及给护理人员带来伦理困境而备受争议。事件后审查(PIR),即在约束措施实施后让患者和护理人员参与其中,已被用于预防伤害并减少约束措施的使用。然而,这种干预措施的科学知识基础尚不明确。因此,本范围综述的目的是探索关于事件后审查的现有知识,并评估事件后审查在多大程度上能够将与约束相关的使用和伤害降至最低,支持护理人员处理专业和伦理困境,并提高精神卫生保健的护理质量。
对MEDLINE、PsychInfo、Cinahl、Sociological Abstracts和Web of Science数据库进行了系统检索。检索词来源于研究对象、干预措施和研究背景。
纳入了12项研究,其中6项为定量研究,4项为定性研究,2项为混合方法研究。这些研究来自瑞典、英国、加拿大和美国。研究的设计和质量各不相同,事件后审查的实施方式也有所不同。5项研究将事件后审查作为约束措施使用后的一种单独干预措施进行探索,在其他研究中,事件后审查被描述为约束减少计划中的几个组成部分之一。结果似乎很有前景,但单独使用事件后审查并未产生显著结果。患者和护理人员报告事件后审查具有以下作用:1)是一个审查约束事件的机会,否则他们不会有这样的机会;2)促进患者的个人康复过程;3)激发对组织发展和护理的专业反思。
缺乏直接针对约束措施使用后事件后审查的科学文献。然而,结果表明事件后审查可能有助于在约束措施的推广和实施方式方面实现更专业和符合伦理的实践。事件后审查的实践方式各不相同,因此无法推荐特定的手册。需要对事件后审查的使用及其后果进行更多研究,尤其是事件后审查在精神卫生保健中预防约束措施方面的潜力。