Green Eleanor, Kellett Stephen, Gaskell Chris, Hobbs Martin
The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
Rotherham Doncaster and South Humber Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster, Doncaster, UK.
BMJ Open Qual. 2025 Sep 2;14(3):e002956. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002956.
Restrictive practices (ie, physical restraint, rapid tranquilisation and seclusion) are used to manage risk of harm to self and/or others during inpatient psychiatric admissions. Restrictive practices can be physically and psychologically hazardous for both patients and staff, but there have been few well-controlled evaluations of interventions to reduce restrictive practices.
To conduct a controlled evaluation of the implementation of a culture change intervention on a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU) compared with a control PICU on use of restraint.
A new staff role was created on the intervention PICU (ie, the ; RRIA). The RRIA met with patients/carers and advised, trained, supervised and debriefed the multidisciplinary team concerning restraint. Mixed methods evaluated the effectiveness of the RRIA role. Restraint outcomes on the intervention and the control PICU were compared pre (19 months) and post intervention (19 months). Qualitative interviews were conducted with the RRIA, the PICU ward manager and the RRI organisational lead.
On the intervention PICU, there were significant reductions in the use of seclusion, full restraint and use of standing holds. Qualitatively, positive changes to the safety culture of the intervention PICU were reported, and these were consistently rated as important, impactful and unlikely without the RRIA role.
PICU safety culture can improve when specific roles focused on changing ward practices around restraints are implemented. More controlled evaluations of reducing restraint interventions on PICUs are needed.
在住院精神科治疗期间,限制措施(即身体约束、快速镇静和隔离)用于管理对自身和/或他人造成伤害的风险。限制措施对患者和工作人员都可能造成身体和心理上的危害,但对减少限制措施的干预措施进行的严格对照评估很少。
对精神科重症监护病房(PICU)实施文化变革干预措施与对照PICU在约束使用方面进行对照评估。
在干预性PICU设立了一个新的工作人员角色(即RRIA)。RRIA与患者/护理人员会面,并就约束问题向多学科团队提供建议、培训、监督和汇报。采用混合方法评估RRIA角色的有效性。比较干预性PICU和对照PICU在干预前(19个月)和干预后(19个月)的约束结果。对RRIA、PICU病房经理和RRIA组织负责人进行了定性访谈。
在干预性PICU,隔离、完全约束和站立约束的使用显著减少。定性方面,报告了干预性PICU安全文化的积极变化,并且这些变化一直被评为重要、有影响力且如果没有RRIA角色则不太可能发生。
当实施专注于改变病房约束做法的特定角色时,PICU安全文化可以得到改善。需要对减少PICU约束干预措施进行更多的对照评估。