Humane and Comprehensive Management of Challenging Behaviour in Health and Social Care: Cross-Sectional Study Testing Newly Developed Instrument.

BACKGROUND: Management of challenging behaviour causes victimization and violates the human rights of service users in psychiatric and long-term settings for people having mental health issues and learning disabilities. The purpose of the research was to develop and test an instrument for measuring humane behaviour management (HCMCB). The research was guided by the following questions: (1) What is the structure and content of the Human and Comprehensive management of Challenging Behaviour (HCMCB) instrument, (2) What are the psychometric properties of the HCMCB instrument, and (3) How do Finnish health and social care professionals evaluate their humane and comprehensive management of challenging behaviour? METHODS: A cross-sectional study design and STROBE checklist were applied. A convenience sample of health and social care professionals (n = 233) studying at the University of Applied Sciences (n = 13) was recruited. RESULTS: The EFA revealed a 14-factor structure and included a total of 63 items. The Cronbach's alpha values for factors varied from 0.535 to 0.939. The participants rated their individual competence higher than leadership and organizational culture. CONCLUSIONS: HCMCB is a useful tool for evaluating competencies, leadership, and organizational practices in the context of challenging behaviour. HCMCB should be further tested in various international contexts involving challenging behaviour with large samples and longitudinal design.

Violence by clients and patients against social and healthcare staff - An integrative review of staff's well-being at work, implementation of work and leaders' activities.

AIM: The aim of this study was to compile, assess and synthesise empirical research on violence by social and healthcare clients or patients against staff and its connections to staff's well-being at work, implementation of work and activities of leaders related to it. BACKGROUND: Workplace violence against social and healthcare staff is a global and daily problem. One in three employees encounters violence from patients or clients and the risk of this is 16 times higher compared to other professions. None of the recent reviews on this topic were focused on the well-being at work, implementation of work or leaders' role in the cases of violence of clients or patients against the staff. DESIGN: An integrative review reported according to PRISMA Checklist. METHODS: The search was conducted to CINAHL, PubMed, PsychINFO and Scopus databases resulting in 21 articles. The quality of the articles was evaluated, and the data were analysed narratively. RESULTS: The workplace violence committed by clients and patients was negatively connected to staff's psychological, emotional and physical well-being at work and to their work performance and commitment. The leaders found this form of workplace violence challenging and ethically conflicted and felt that they were left alone without training and support. The employees expressed disappointment with their leaders' activities and suggested many measures to make environment safer to staff and patients. CONCLUSIONS: In future, intervention studies are needed for prevention of workplace violence by patients and clients against staff and for supporting the well-being at work of staff in relation to violent incidents. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Workplaces should introduce uniform protocols for reporting, preventing and processing workplace violence committed by clients and patients. An open dialogue with leaders and co-workers of the cases is of high importance. Leaders and staff need training that ensure patient and work safety.

Conceptual framework for a comprehensive competence in managing challenging behaviour: The views of trained instructors.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: There is body of knowledge available about the harms associated with restrictive interventions used in behaviour management, service users' perceptions of the use of restraints, and staff competence in behaviour management. The staff perspective has been studied in terms of staff exposure, responses to and prevention of aggression, staff-related factors associated with service user aggression, and staff attitudes and perceptions towards violence. The definitions of competence in behaviour management provided in training interventions are fragmented and based on unilateral measurements. Training interventions with the purpose of enhancing staff competence in behaviour management are organized regularly, yet there is a lack of clarity on how effective these interventions are. Inadequate conceptual understanding of behaviour management can weaken the effectiveness of these interventions. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Our study produced new knowledge by providing a preliminary conceptual framework that can be used to comprehensively describe and assess competence in managing challenging behaviour and to cover safely the whole care process. Humane care and ethical sensitivity should be the premises of interaction with people in distress. We also pointed out the needs for conceptual clarification of the concepts of confidence, support and restraint. We provide important new insight into the leadership and cultural issues of behaviour management that is relevant for patients, staff members and healthcare organizations. We found that staff members do not consider service user safety and workplace safety as opposing issues. Further, we provide new perspectives for prevention, the risk assessment process and effective communication in the context of behaviour management. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: A comprehensive understanding of the competences related to behaviour management will foster universal definitions for "support" and "restraint," which can then be used to ensure that the best practices are used for behaviour management. Organizational culture and participative leadership on behaviour management should be developed with a special focus on safety issues, common understanding of comprehensive competence, risk assessment and prevention, views regarding the use of restraints, and teamwork. ABSTRACT: Introduction Previous research concerning staff views of behaviour management has not considered instructors' views. The definitions of competence in behaviour management are fragmented, which can undermine the effectiveness of training interventions. Aim/Question This study aimed to describe Finnish and British Management of Actual or Potential Aggression instructors' perceptions of safety and behaviour management-related competences and create a conceptual framework for comprehensive competence. Method An explorative-descriptive qualitative approach with purposive sampling (N = 22), semi-structured interviews and abductive content analysis. Results Conceptual framework of comprehensive competence in managing challenging behaviour includes five categories-knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence and ethical sensitivity-and 21 subcategories. Competent staff and supportive leadership ensured safety, while inconsistent risk management culture, the health and behaviour of service users, and inadequate staff orientation endangered safety. Discussion The study produced new knowledge of safety issues and competences from the perspective of the instructors who deliver behaviour management training. Implications for practice Competence to manage challenging behaviour should be developed based on our conceptual framework to provide an effective and safe training. Prevention, the risk assessment process, alternative communication, and the definitions of "confidence," "support" and "restraint" should all be sufficiently addressed in future training.

Patient safety and staff competence in managing challenging behavior based on feedback from former psychiatric patients.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to describe the perceptions and lived experiences of former psychiatric patients of their own and/or co-patients' behavior that nursing staff has regarded as challenging and that has resulted in behavior management. DESIGN AND METHODS: An explorative-descriptive qualitative design with video vignettes, semistructured interviews, and abductive content analysis. FINDINGS: Many reasons for different kinds of patient behavior that were considered challenging by staff were identified. Delivering care based on patients' needs was identified as core staff competence. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Findings can be utilized when pursuing restraint reduction in psychiatric care by enhancing staff competence.

A quantitative systematic review of the effects of training interventions on enhancing the competence of nursing staff in managing challenging patient behaviour.

AIMS: This systematic quantitative review identifies and summarizes the current knowledge and effects of training interventions for managing patients' challenging behaviour. BACKGROUND: Challenging behaviour is an acknowledged worldwide healthcare problem and its management can have a huge impact on quality of care. Evidence-based training interventions that focus on managing challenging behaviour are needed, but few tools for the systematic evaluation of these interventions are currently offered. DESIGN: A quantitative systematic review following the 2008 Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidelines. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, Scopus, PsycInfo, PubMed and Cochrane were searched using the same terms for papers published in English from 2005-2015. REVIEW METHODS: Studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias, according to the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group criteria. A narrative summary was conducted. RESULTS: We included 17 studies and evaluated 16 training interventions. Interventions were classified into four key themes: disengagements, communication, controlling behavioural symptoms and restrictive measures. Our review showed that interventions were more likely to decrease violent incident rates and increase staff confidence than change staff attitudes or increase knowledge. The elements of competence used to manage challenging behaviour were measured unilaterally. The evidence provided by studies was largely weak. CONCLUSION: The variety of measurements used in the studies made comparing the effectiveness of the training interventions difficult. An individual's competence to manage challenging behaviour needs to be defined and a comprehensive scale for evaluating competence is also needed. Patient safety should be included in future evaluations.