Objective The author reviewed the literature published since 1972 concerning restraint and seclusion. Method The review began with a computerized literature search. Further sources were located through citations from articles identified in the original search. Results The author synthesized the contents of the articles reviewed using the categories of indications and contraindications; rates of seclusion and restraint as well as demographic, clinical, and environmental factors that affect these rates; effects on patients and staff; implementation; and training. Conclusions The literature on restraint and seclusion supports the following. 1) Seclusion and restraint are basically efficacious in preventing injury and reducing agitation. 2) It is nearly impossible to operate a program for severely symptomatic individuals without some form of seclusion or physical or mechanical restraint. 3) Restraint and seclusion have deleterious physical and psychological effects on patients and staff, and the psychiatric consumer/survivor movement has emphasized these effects. 4) Demographic and clinical factors have limited influence on rates of restraint and seclusion. 5) Local nonclinical factors, such as cultural biases, staff role perceptions, and the attitude of the hospital administration, have a greater influence on rates of restraint and seclusion. 6) Training in prediction and prevention of violence, in self-defense, and in implementation of restraint and/or seclusion is valuable in reducing rates and untoward effects. 7) Studies comparing well-defined training programs have potential usefulness.

Restraint and seclusion: A review of the literature.

The apparently widespread practice of physical restraint of the elderly has received little systematic research, despite reported clinical awareness of its iatrogenic effects on frail elders. Prevalence rates in various settings range between 6% and 86%, with cognitive impairment an important risk factor for restraint. Despite strongly held beliefs, efficacy of restraints for safeguarding patients from injury has not been demonstrated clinically. This paper reviews the current status of knowledge regarding physical restraint use with the elderly and suggests a research agenda and implications for ethical practice.

Tying down the elderly. A review of the literature on physical restraint.

This parameter reviews the current state of the prevention and management of child and adolescent aggressive behavior in psychiatric institutions, with particular reference to the indications and use of seclusion and restraint. It also presents guidelines that have been developed in response to professional, regulatory, and public concern about the use of restrictive interventions with aggressive patients with regard to personal safety and patient rights. The literature on the use of seclusion, physical restraint, mechanical restraint, and chemical restraint is reviewed, and procedures for carrying out each of these interventions are described. Clinical and regulatory agency perspectives on these interventions are presented. Effectiveness, indications, contraindications, complications, and adverse effects of seclusion and restraint procedures are addressed. Interventions are presented to provide more opportunities to promote patient independence and satisfaction with treatment while diminishing the necessity of using restrictive procedures.

Practice Parameter for the Prevention and Management of Aggressive Behavior in Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Institutions, With Special Reference to Seclusion and Restraint

An October 1998 Hartford Courant investigative series highlighted alleged cases of brutality and death suffered by involuntarily secluded, restrained, and/or emergently medicated patients. The resulting public and professional furor prompted a spate of new federal regulations and legislative initiatives setting national standards for reporting and clinical oversight. These events provide stimulus for this literature review. Rates, duration, and methods of seclusion and restraint still vary widely. Little evidence is available to guide clinical practice regarding relative benefits and risks of various methods to control acute adult patient aggression; even less evidence exists in child and adolescent populations. Further efficacy and effectiveness studies are needed to address this issue. Various programmatic efforts successfully reduce seclusion and restraint-at times dramatically-and can be used as examples of systematic quality improvement so "best practices" may evolve and spread throughout psychiatric inpatient settings.

Seclusion and restraint: a review of recent literature.

Little information exists on the use of mechanical restraints among nonpsychiatric inpatients. This prospective study evaluates their use among consecutive medical and surgical admissions to an acute care hospital. Daily direct observation of patients and hospital record review provided data on potential predictors of restraint, reasons for their application, complications, and outcome. Cox regression analysis was used to calculate relative risk of restraint while adjusting for duration of hospitalization as well as other variables. Restraints were applied to 37 (17%) of the 222 study patients. Restrained patients were eight times more likely to die during hospitalization (24% v 3%; P less than 0.01). Abnormal mental status exam, diagnosis of dementia, surgery, and presence of monitoring and support devices (eg, intravenous lines) were statistically significant independent predictors of restraint. Mechanical restraint is a common occurrence among nonpsychiatric inpatients particularly those with impaired mentation, requirement for surgery, or intensive medical intervention. Identification of medical and surgical patients at risk for restraint may reduce the use of these devices by concentrating surveillance and prevention on this group.

Binding the elderly: A prospective study of the use of mechanical restraints in an acute care hospital.

Restrictive procedures are frequently used in residential facilities for the mentally illand developmentally disabled despite bumanitarian, professional, and legal concerns. Administrators in a regional residential facility for the developmentally disabled instructed staff to reduce the use of seclusion, mechanical restraint, andpsychotropic drugs in the facility and set clearly defined policies and procedures on the use of such restraints. Data were gathered on the prevalence of restrictive procedures before and after the new policies were implemented, and staff received frequent feedback. The data showed that in the two and a half years following the adoption of the new policies, the use of seclusion, mechanical restraint, and psychotropic drugs dropped significantly without a concomitant increase in violent incidents, staff turnover, or use of other restrictive procedures. The authors condude that instructions and feedback are an effective and inexpensive way to reduce the use of restrictive treatment ...

Neal A. Davidson

Papers

Reducing the use of restrictive procedures in a residential facility.