Post-incident reviews after restraints-Potential and pitfalls. Patients' experiences and considerations.

WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE SUBJECT?: Restraint has negative psychological, physical and relational consequences for mental health patients and care providers. Several countries have implemented seclusion and restraint (S/R) reduction programmes in which post-incident reviews (PIRs) including patients and care providers are one of several strategies. Existing knowledge indicates that PIRs have the potential to contribute to S/R prevention, but knowledge of the patients' perspectives on PIRs is scarce. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The paper provides in-depth knowledge about patients' experiences of being participants in PIRs after restraint events. Patients experience PIRs to result in being strengthened and developing new coping strategies. The paper reveals pitfalls when planning and conducting PIRs that make patients experience PIRs as meaningless, feel objectified or long for living communication and closeness. The patients' mental state, the quality of the relationships and the services' care philosophies, influence patients' experiences of PIRs as supporting their personal recovery processes or as continuation of coercive contexts. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Patients' vulnerability during the PIRs must be acknowledged. Trusted persons or advocacy must support the patient in the PIR and thus reduce the power-dependence imbalance. The PIR must be conducted in a supportive, non-punishing atmosphere. Patients must influence planning for the PIR concerning time point and participants and themes to be discussed. The PIR forms should be extended to support the patients' empowerment and well-being. ABSTRACT: Introduction Post-incident reviews (PIRs), including patients, nurses and other care providers, following incidents of restraints are recommended in mental health services. Few studies have examined patients' experiences and considerations concerning PIRs. Aim The study aims to explore patients' perspectives on PIRs in relation to how they experience participation in PIRs and further view PIRs' potential for care improvement and restraint prevention. Method We conducted a qualitative study based on individual interviews. Eight current and previous inpatients from two Norwegian mental health services were interviewed. Results The patients experienced PIRs as variations on a continuum from being strengthened, developing new coping strategies and processing the restraint event to at the other end of the continuum; PIRs as meaningless, feeling objectified and longing for living communication and closeness. Discussion PIRs' beneficial potential is extended in the study. The findings highlight however that personal and institutional conditions influence whether patients experience PIRs as an arena for recovery promotion or PIRs as continuation of coercive contexts. Implications for practice We recommend patients' active participation in planning the PIR. PIRs should be conducted in a supportive atmosphere, including trusted persons, emphasizing and acknowledging a dialogical approach.

Post-incident reviews-a gift to the Ward or just another procedure? Care providers' experiences and considerations regarding post-incident reviews after restraint in mental health services. A qualitative study.

Public guidelines in many western countries recommend post-incident reviews (PIRs) with patients after restraint use in mental health care. PIRs are one of several elements of seclusion and restraint reduction in internationally used programmes. PIRs may improve restraint prevention, patients' recovery processes and care providers' ethical mindfulness. The knowledge base on PIRs is, however, vague. This qualitative study explores professional care providers' experiences and considerations regarding PIRs that included patients after restraint use in a Norwegian context. METHODS: Within a phenomenological hermeneutical framework, 19 multidisciplinary care providers were interviewed about their experiences and views regarding PIRs that included patients after restraint events. The interviews were performed over the period 2015-2016. Data analysis followed a data-driven stepwise approach in line with thematic content analysis. A group of two patient consultants in mental health services, and one patient's next of kin, contributed with input regarding the interview guide and analysis process. RESULTS: Care providers experienced PIRs as having the potential to improve the quality of care through a) knowledge of other perspectives and solutions; b) increased ethical and professional awareness; and c) emotional and relational processing. However, the care providers considered that PIRs' potential could be further exploited as they struggled to get hold on the patients' voices in the encounter. The care providers considered that issue to be attributable to the patients' conditions, the care providers' safety and skills and the characteristics of institutional and cultural conditions. CONCLUSION: Human care philosophies and a framework of care ethics seem to be preconditions for promoting patients' active participation in PIRs after restraints. Patients' voices strengthen PIRs' potential to improve care and may also contribute to restraint prevention. To minimise the power imbalance in PIRs, patients' vulnerability, dependency and perceived dignity must be recognised. Patients' individual needs and preferences should be assessed and mapped when planning PIRs, particularly regarding location, time and preferred participants. Care providers must receive training to strengthen their confidence in conducting PIRs in the best possible way. Patients' experiences with PIRs should be explored, especially if participation by trusted family members, peers or advocates may support the patients in PIRs.

Post-incident review after restraint in mental health care -a potential for knowledge development, recovery promotion and restraint prevention. A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Use of physical restraint is a common practice in mental healthcare, but is controversial due to risk of physical and psychological harm to patients and creating ethical dilemmas for care providers. Post-incident review (PIR), that involve patient and care providers after restraints, have been deployed to prevent harm and to reduce restraint use. However, this intervention has an unclear scientific knowledge base. Thus, the aim of this scoping review was to explore the current knowledge of PIR and to assess to what extent PIR can minimize restraint-related use and harm, support care providers in handling professional and ethical dilemmas, and improve the quality of care in mental healthcare. METHODS: Systematic searches in the MEDLINE, PsychInfo, Cinahl, Sociological Abstracts and Web of Science databases were carried out. The search terms were derived from the population, intervention and settings. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included, six quantitative, four qualitative and two mixed methods. The studies were from Sweden, United Kingdom, Canada and United States. The studies' design and quality varied, and PIR s' were conducted differently. Five studies explored PIR s' as a separate intervention after restraint use, in the other studies, PIR s' were described as one of several components in restraint reduction programs. Outcomes seemed promising, but no significant outcome were related to using PIR alone. Patients and care providers reported PIR to: 1) be an opportunity to review restraint events, they would not have had otherwise, and 2) promote patients' personal recovery processes, and 3) stimulate professional reflection on organizational development and care. CONCLUSION: Scientific literature directly addressing PIR s' after restraint use is lacking. However, results indicate that PIR may contribute to more professional and ethical practice regarding restraint promotion and the way restraint is executed. The practice of PIR varied, so a specific manual cannot be recommended. More research on PIR use and consequences is needed, especially PIR's potential to contribute to restraint prevention in mental healthcare.