Literature DB >> 21811957

[After 200 years of psychiatry: are mechanical restraints in Germany still inevitable?].

Tilman Steinert1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mechanical restraint and seclusion are not therapeutic interventions but procedures to safeguard patients or staff representing a failure of therapeutic approaches. Quality management including benchmarkings yields considerable variations between different hospitals. However, an enduring and significant decrease in the frequency and duration of such coercive measures so far has not been achieved by means of quality management. A new set of approaches is therefore required.
RESULTS: Amending the British practice of "physical restraint" for German conditions, a technique of holding the patient was developed accompanied by manualised interventions of verbal de-escalation. In contrast to mechanical restraint, the technique represents a therapeutic intervention and is usually of short duration. An implementation is planned in a group of hospitals collaborating in the prevention of violence and coercion in psychiatry.
CONCLUSIONS: This new technique appears a promising approach to fundamentally change the practice of mechanical restraint in Germany. Evidence of the effect of this technique on frequency and duration of mechanical restraints needs to be gathered. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21811957     DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1276871

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychiatr Prax        ISSN: 0303-4259


  8 in total

1.  [Coercive measures in psychiatric clinics in Germany: current practice (2012)].

Authors:  T Steinert; P Schmid
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.214

2.  [Mechanical restraint: the clinical practice in a psychiatric university hospital].

Authors:  Beatrice Frajo-Apor; Immina Macha; Georg Kemmler; Ullrich Meise
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr       Date:  2013-02-26

3.  [End of a psychiatric era? : Impact on the use of mechanical restraints after prohibition of psychiatric cage beds in a regional psychiatric department in Vienna, Austria].

Authors:  Christoph Sulyok; Petra Weiland-Fiedler; Sarah Schwehla; Vera Pfersmann
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr       Date:  2016-10-06

4.  Has the public taken notice of psychiatric reform? The image of psychiatric hospitals in Germany 1990-2011.

Authors:  Matthias C Angermeyer; Herbert Matschinger; Georg Schomerus
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 4.328

5.  Machine Learning: An Approach in Identifying Risk Factors for Coercion Compared to Binary Logistic Regression.

Authors:  Florian Hotzy; Anastasia Theodoridou; Paul Hoff; Andres R Schneeberger; Erich Seifritz; Sebastian Olbrich; Matthias Jäger
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2018-06-12       Impact factor: 4.157

6.  Comparing Attitudes to Containment Measures of Patients, Health Care Professionals and Next of Kin.

Authors:  Thomas Reisch; Simone Beeri; Georges Klein; Philipp Meier; Philippe Pfeifer; Etienne Buehler; Florian Hotzy; Matthias Jaeger
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2018-10-26       Impact factor: 4.157

7.  Attitudinal variance among patients, next of kin and health care professionals towards the use of containment measures in three psychiatric hospitals in Switzerland.

Authors:  Florian Hotzy; Matthias Jaeger; Etienne Buehler; Sonja Moetteli; Georges Klein; Simone Beeri; Thomas Reisch
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 3.630

Review 8.  The use of coercive interventions in mental health care in Germany and the Netherlands. A comparison of the developments in two neighboring countries.

Authors:  Tilman Steinert; Eric O Noorthoorn; Cornelis L Mulder
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2014-09-24
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.