College of Nursing & Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Nurs Health Sci. 2021 Jun;23(2):325-336. doi: 10.1111/nhs.12822. Epub 2021 Mar 11.
With an imperative to reduce or eliminate the use of coercive practices in mental health care it is important to understand the experience of service users and staff. This review aimed to synthesize qualitative studies, published between 1996 and 2020, reporting on mental health service users' and staff's experiences of chemical restraint. The databases PsycINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched. Three analytic themes were identified from 17 included articles, synthesizing the experiences of service users and staff. These were "Unjustified versusjustified," "Violence versus necessity," and "Reflecting back: Positives and negatives." Service users viewed chemical restraint as an unjustified response to "behaviors of concern" and experienced it as a violent act with negative outcomes, although some saw it as necessary in retrospect and preferred it to other forms of coercion. Staff generally viewed it as a justified response to "behaviors of concern" and experienced it as appropriate within the constraints of staff numbers and limited alternatives. These findings identify nuances not apparent in the literature, which has generally conflated all forms of coercive practices.
在减少或消除精神卫生保健中强制手段的使用的必要性下,了解服务使用者和工作人员的体验非常重要。本综述旨在综合 1996 年至 2020 年间发表的定性研究,报告精神卫生服务使用者和工作人员对化学约束的体验。检索了 PsycINFO、CINAHL、MEDLINE、Embase、Emcare、Web of Science 和 Scopus 数据库。从 17 篇纳入的文章中确定了三个分析主题,综合了服务使用者和工作人员的体验。这些主题是“没有正当理由与有正当理由”、“暴力与必要”和“反思:正反两面”。服务使用者认为化学约束是对“令人担忧的行为”的不正当反应,并将其视为一种具有负面后果的暴力行为,尽管有些人回顾过去认为它是必要的,并宁愿选择其他形式的强制手段。工作人员普遍认为,这是对“令人担忧的行为”的合理反应,并且在工作人员人数和有限的替代方案的限制内,认为它是适当的。这些发现确定了文献中没有明显的细微差别,文献普遍将所有形式的强制手段混为一谈。