Krishnan Vijay, Deb Koushik Sinha, Soni Pankhuri, Tom Ashlyn, Sharma Panna, Sagar Rajesh
Department of Psychiatry, AIIMS, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Department of Psychiatry, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Indian J Psychiatry. 2025 Aug;67(8):743-753. doi: 10.4103/indianjpsychiatry_982_24. Epub 2025 Aug 15.
Coercive interventions may be required during psychiatric in-patient care, but require careful monitoring to minimize inappropriate use.
In this article, we aimed to systematically review published literature on the frequency and patterns of selected coercive methods in mental health establishments (MHEs) in India.
From a systematic screening of four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PSYCINFO) supplemented by searching relevant citations and selected journals, we retrieved studies of frequency and patterns of mechanical restraint, chemical restraint and seclusion at Indian MHEs.
Nine studies reported 1595 restraint events over 62699.86 in-patient days, i.e between 1.64 to 175.71 events per 1000 in-patient days or 16.38 to 195.22 events per 100 admissions. Chemical restraints using combinations of haloperidol with promethazine or lorazepam were preferred over physical restraints or combined physical/chemical restraint in most (8/9) studies. No clear patterns of acuity, setting or diagnostic break-up could be ascertained. No studies reported on the use of seclusion. From these results, we estimate that in a 30 bedded fully occupied psychiatric unit in India, a median of 43 admissions, 7 restrained patients and 26 monthly restraint events occur per month.
The varied rates suggest differences in clinical practice including practice culture (eg the involvement of caregivers), but might also reflect incomplete or inconsistent reporting. Determinants of restraint, which may operate at the level of the patient characteristics, staffing, or ward culture; needs further delineation. Finally, restraint reports are rare, and uniform reporting guidelines will help policy makers understand the phenomenon better.
在精神科住院治疗期间可能需要采取强制性干预措施,但需要仔细监测以尽量减少不当使用。
在本文中,我们旨在系统回顾印度精神卫生机构(MHEs)中选定强制性方法的使用频率和模式的已发表文献。
通过对四个数据库(MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL和PSYCINFO)进行系统筛选,并辅以搜索相关引文和选定期刊,我们检索了印度精神卫生机构中机械约束、化学约束和隔离的频率和模式的研究。
九项研究报告了在62699.86个住院日期间发生的1595起约束事件,即每1000个住院日有1.64至175.71起事件,或每100次入院有16.38至195.22起事件。在大多数(8/9)研究中,使用氟哌啶醇与异丙嗪或劳拉西泮组合的化学约束比身体约束或联合身体/化学约束更受青睐。无法确定明确的急性程度、环境或诊断分类模式。没有研究报告隔离的使用情况。根据这些结果,我们估计在印度一个有30张床位且满员的精神科病房中,每月平均有43次入院、7名受约束患者和26次每月约束事件。
不同的发生率表明临床实践存在差异,包括实践文化(如护理人员的参与情况),但也可能反映报告不完整或不一致。约束的决定因素可能在患者特征、人员配备或病房文化层面起作用;需要进一步明确。最后,约束报告很少见,统一的报告指南将有助于政策制定者更好地理解这一现象。