Seclusion and Restraint in Psychiatry: Patients' Experiences and Practical Suggestions on How to Improve Practices and Use Alternatives
Article first published online: 16 FEB 2011
© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Perspectives in Psychiatric Care
Volume 48, Issue 1, pages 16–24, January 2012
How to Cite
Kontio, R., Joffe, G., Putkonen, H., Kuosmanen, L., Hane, K., Holi, M. and Välimäki, M. (2012), Seclusion and Restraint in Psychiatry: Patients' Experiences and Practical Suggestions on How to Improve Practices and Use Alternatives. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 48: 16–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6163.2010.00301.x
- Issue published online: 22 DEC 2011
- Article first published online: 16 FEB 2011
- First Received March 17, 2010; Final Revision received October 15, 2010; Accepted for publication November 9, 2010.
- Alternative method;
- inductive content analysis;
- psychiatric inpatient;
PURPOSE: This study explored psychiatric inpatients' experiences of, and their suggestions for, improvement of seclusion/restraint, and alternatives to their use in Finland.
METHODS: The data were collected by focused interviews (n= 30) and were analyzed with inductive content analysis.
RESULTS: Patients' perspectives received insufficient attention during seclusion/restraint processes. Improvements (e.g., humane treatment) and alternatives (e.g., empathetic patient–staff interaction) to seclusion/restraint, as suggested by the patients, focused on essential parts of nursing practice but have not been largely adopted.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Patients' basic needs have to be met, and patient–staff interaction has to also continue during seclusion/restraint. Providing patients with meaningful activities, planning beforehand, documenting the patients' wishes, and making patient–staff agreements reduce the need for restrictions and offer alternatives for seclusion/restraint. Service users must be involved in all practical development.