Vruwink Fleur J, VanDerNagel Joanneke E L, Noorthoorn Eric O, Nijman Henk L I, Mulder Cornelis L
Mediant Geestelijke Gezondheidszorg (GGZ), Enschede, Netherlands.
Tactus, Deventer, Netherlands.
Front Psychiatry. 2022 Apr 15;13:871525. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.871525. eCollection 2022.
In the Netherlands, seclusion of patients with a psychiatric disorder is a last-resort measure to be used only in the event of (imminent) severe danger or harm. Although aggressive behavior is often involved, seclusions not preceded by aggression also seem to occur. We sought insight into the non-aggressive reasons underlying seclusion and investigated the factors associated with it.
We included all patients admitted to a Dutch psychiatric hospital in 2008 and 2009. Seclusions had been registered on Argus-forms, and aggression incidents had been registered on the Staff Observation Aggression Scale-Revised (SOAS-R), inspectorate forms and/or patient files. Determinants of seclusion with vs. without prior aggression were analyzed using logistic regression. Reasons for seclusion without prior aggression were evaluated qualitatively and grouped into main themes.
Of 1,106 admitted patients, 184 (17%) were secluded at some time during admission. Twenty-one (11.4%) were excluded because information on their seclusion was lacking. In 23 cases (14%), neither SOAS-R, inspectorate forms nor individual patient files indicated any aggression. Univariable and multivariable regression both showed seclusion without preceding aggression to be negatively associated with daytime and the first day of hospitalization. In other words, seclusion related to aggression occurred more on the first day, and during daytime, while seclusion for non-aggressive reasons occurred relatively more after the first day, and during nighttime. Our qualitative findings showed two main themes of non-aggressive reasons for seclusion: "disruptive behavior" and "beneficial to patient."
Awareness of the different reasons for seclusion may improve interventions on reducing its use. Thorough examination of different sources showed that few seclusions had not been preceded by aggression. The use of seclusion would be considerably reduced through interventions that prevent aggression or handle aggression incidents in other ways than seclusion. However, attention should also be paid to the remaining reasons for seclusion, such as handling disruptive behavior and focusing on the beneficial effects of reduced stimuli. Future research on interventions to reduce the use of seclusion should not only aim to reduce seclusion but should also establish whether seclusions preceded by aggression decrease different from seclusions that are not preceded by aggression.
在荷兰,对患有精神疾病的患者进行隔离是一种万不得已的措施,仅在(即将发生)严重危险或伤害的情况下使用。虽然隔离通常与攻击性行为有关,但在没有攻击行为之前就进行隔离的情况似乎也会发生。我们试图深入了解隔离背后的非攻击性行为原因,并调查与之相关的因素。
我们纳入了2008年和2009年入住一家荷兰精神病医院的所有患者。隔离情况记录在阿格斯表格上,攻击事件记录在工作人员观察攻击量表修订版(SOAS-R)、检查表格和/或患者档案中。使用逻辑回归分析有攻击行为和无攻击行为之前进行隔离的决定因素。对无攻击行为之前进行隔离的原因进行定性评估,并归纳为主要主题。
在1106名入院患者中,有184名(17%)在住院期间的某个时间被隔离。21名(11.4%)被排除,因为缺乏关于他们被隔离的信息。在23例(14%)中,SOAS-R、检查表格或患者个人档案均未显示有任何攻击行为。单变量和多变量回归均显示,无攻击行为之前的隔离与白天和住院第一天呈负相关。换句话说,与攻击行为相关的隔离更多发生在第一天和白天,而因非攻击性行为原因进行的隔离相对更多发生在第一天之后和夜间。我们的定性研究结果显示了无攻击行为原因进行隔离的两个主要主题:“破坏性行为”和“对患者有益”。
了解隔离的不同原因可能会改善减少隔离使用的干预措施。对不同来源的全面检查表明,很少有隔离是在没有攻击行为之前进行的。通过预防攻击行为或以除隔离之外的其他方式处理攻击事件的干预措施,隔离的使用将大幅减少。然而,也应关注剩余的隔离原因,如处理破坏性行为以及关注减少刺激的有益效果。未来关于减少隔离使用的干预措施的研究不仅应旨在减少隔离,还应确定有攻击行为之前的隔离与无攻击行为之前的隔离减少情况是否不同。