Literature DB >> 12873661

Social validation data on three methods of physical restraint: views of consumers, staff and students.

Joanna Cunningham1, Andy McDonnell, Simon Easton, Peter Sturmey.   

Abstract

The use and evaluation of restraint methods with people with mental retardation is a continuing area of concern. Twenty-four undergraduate students, 21 residential care staff and 18 service-users from community settings rated videotapes of three physical restraint procedures. Two of the methods involved restraining an individual on the floor and a third method involved restraining an individual in a chair. Participants answered two open-ended questions to rate the methods of restraint and rated the methods on a 5-point scale of satisfaction [J. Ment. Defic. Res. 30 (1986) 369]. Participants also rated the three restraint methods by a forced-choice comparison. Restraint was rated negatively by all participants. However, both the satisfaction ratings and the forced-choice methods rated the chair method of restraint as most acceptable all three groups of participants. Consumers rated restraint more negatively than other groups. Restraint was evaluated negatively by all three groups, but the chair method was rated the least worst.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12873661     DOI: 10.1016/s0891-4222(03)00044-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Dev Disabil        ISSN: 0891-4222


  1 in total

1.  Social Validity Assessment of Physical Restraint Intervention by Care Providers of Adults with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

Authors:  James K Luiselli; James M Sperry; Christine Draper
Journal:  Behav Anal Pract       Date:  2015-08-07
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.