Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Subscribe now for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Least restrictive alternatives: do they really work?

Least restrictive alternatives: do they really work? Seclusion and restraint continue to spark debate regarding their therapeutic value and ethical, legal, and humanitarian implications, yet they remain frequently used forms of treatment in psychiatric settings. Identifying specific alternatives to seclusion and restraint use, teaching nursing staff how and when to use them, and determining their effect on patient outcome are important quality improvement issues. A quality improvement study conducted at a long-term care psychiatric facility identified alternatives that nursing staff used and their effect on reducing seclusion and restraint rates. A total of 773 incidents of disruptive behavior were managed with least restrictive alternatives and did not require the use of seclusion or restraint. One-to-one verbal intervention followed by medication as needed represented the most frequently used alternative. Total seclusion and restraint hours decreased by 31 percent, and restraint hours decreased by 47 percent. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of nursing care quality Pubmed

Least restrictive alternatives: do they really work?

Journal of nursing care quality , Volume 11 (1): 9 – Jan 14, 1997

Least restrictive alternatives: do they really work?


Abstract

Seclusion and restraint continue to spark debate regarding their therapeutic value and ethical, legal, and humanitarian implications, yet they remain frequently used forms of treatment in psychiatric settings. Identifying specific alternatives to seclusion and restraint use, teaching nursing staff how and when to use them, and determining their effect on patient outcome are important quality improvement issues. A quality improvement study conducted at a long-term care psychiatric facility identified alternatives that nursing staff used and their effect on reducing seclusion and restraint rates. A total of 773 incidents of disruptive behavior were managed with least restrictive alternatives and did not require the use of seclusion or restraint. One-to-one verbal intervention followed by medication as needed represented the most frequently used alternative. Total seclusion and restraint hours decreased by 31 percent, and restraint hours decreased by 47 percent.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/pubmed/least-restrictive-alternatives-do-they-really-work-qO0h6oJans

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

ISSN
1057-3631
DOI
10.1097/00001786-199610000-00010
pmid
8936879

Abstract

Seclusion and restraint continue to spark debate regarding their therapeutic value and ethical, legal, and humanitarian implications, yet they remain frequently used forms of treatment in psychiatric settings. Identifying specific alternatives to seclusion and restraint use, teaching nursing staff how and when to use them, and determining their effect on patient outcome are important quality improvement issues. A quality improvement study conducted at a long-term care psychiatric facility identified alternatives that nursing staff used and their effect on reducing seclusion and restraint rates. A total of 773 incidents of disruptive behavior were managed with least restrictive alternatives and did not require the use of seclusion or restraint. One-to-one verbal intervention followed by medication as needed represented the most frequently used alternative. Total seclusion and restraint hours decreased by 31 percent, and restraint hours decreased by 47 percent.

Journal

Journal of nursing care qualityPubmed

Published: Jan 14, 1997

There are no references for this article.