BACKGROUND: The management of disturbed behaviour in facilities for those with learning disabilities involves a spectrum of approaches including the prescription of emergency medication, restraint and seclusion. The use of these techniques has recently come under close scrutiny. METHOD: All incidents requiring emergency medication or seclusion that occurred in a large hospital for those with learning disabilities were studied over a six-months period. The precipitating factors, course and outcome of those who had received emergency medication or seclusion were then examined. RESULTS: In all, 286 incidents involving 72 individuals occurred during the study period. The episodes requiring seclusion comprised 19% of all incidents. Two-thirds of the patients involved were male but six female patients accounted for 36% of all incidents. During the second part of the study, when the staff knew that the treatments used were being monitored, there was a significant reduction in use of restraint and emergency drugs given intramuscularly. Patients receiving seclusion were judged to have a better outcome one hour after the onset of the incident compared with those who received medication. CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerns about the use of seclusion, the results of this survey suggest that procedures that remove the patient from the environment contributing to the disturbance may have certain advantages in this population.
BACKGROUND: The management of disturbed behaviour in facilities for those with learning disabilities involves a spectrum of approaches including the prescription of emergency medication, restraint and seclusion. The use of these techniques has recently come under close scrutiny. METHOD: All incidents requiring emergency medication or seclusion that occurred in a large hospital for those with learning disabilities were studied over a six-months period. The precipitating factors, course and outcome of those who had received emergency medication or seclusion were then examined. RESULTS: In all, 286 incidents involving 72 individuals occurred during the study period. The episodes requiring seclusion comprised 19% of all incidents. Two-thirds of the patients involved were male but six female patients accounted for 36% of all incidents. During the second part of the study, when the staff knew that the treatments used were being monitored, there was a significant reduction in use of restraint and emergency drugs given intramuscularly. Patients receiving seclusion were judged to have a better outcome one hour after the onset of the incident compared with those who received medication. CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerns about the use of seclusion, the results of this survey suggest that procedures that remove the patient from the environment contributing to the disturbance may have certain advantages in this population.