Reducing Restrictive

Practices Checklist
A self-assessment tool to help organisations ensure that the use of
coercive and restrictive practice is minimised and the misuse and
abuse of restraint is prevented.

Chris Stirling (Crisis Prevention Institute)

Fran Aiken (Caring Solutions, UK)
Dr. Colin Dale (Caring Solutions, UK)
Prof. Joy Duxbury (University of Central Lancashire, UK)
Checklist Overview
INTRODUCTION
The following self-assessment tool is intended for use by organisations who have joined the Restraint Reduction
Network™ and made a clear public commitment to work together with service users, families, leaders, managers
and frontline staff to ensure coercive and restrictive practice is minimised and the misuse and abuse of restraint is
prevented.

Self-assessment is one of a number of helpful ways to enable an organisation to better understand its performance.
The tool has been designed to help member organisations identify and think about those aspects of performance
that can be celebrated and shared, and to understand which aspects of performance are weaker or not fully
implemented. By undertaking this assessment it is hoped that this information can be used to inform the
organisation’s improvement/development plans.

In addition to informing organisational learning and improvement, the self-assessment tool has been developed
to enable organisations to share their performance so that service users and families, frontline staff, commissioners
and regulators can easily see what is happening: what is going well and what aspects are being improved. Some
organisations may also wish to use the findings of the self-assessment tool to benchmark their service with other
members of the Restraint Reduction Network™ (RRN). However, organisations should note that there is no ‘pass’ or
‘fail’ score, and there is no ‘league table’ which provides evidence to suggest that one organisation is performing
better than another.

ASSESSMENT
Assessment and feedback are essential to organisational learning and improved performance and can be used to
examine any aspect of service delivery at any level within an organisation. Whilst the assessment process can be
undertaken by service users; families; frontline staff or managers; or small teams made up from a cross section of
people/stakeholders within the organisation, the key to assessment is to focus on those aspects of service delivery
which matter most to service users, families and those staff employed to deliver safe, effective and compassionate
services. Regardless of approach, assessors need to be mindful that observer bias can influence findings so it is
important that the process is valid, reliable, transparent and authentic to ensure that the assessment gives clear
insight into organisational performance. When undertaking an assessment it is important to consider:

Validity The extent to which the assessment reflects accurately what is observed and reported and
how well this shows an approach aligned to the assessment criteria or evidence base.
Reliability The extent to which the assessment is fair and consistent.
Transparency The extent to which the assessment is clear to others so everyone knows what is expected/
what evidence is needed.
Authenticity The extent to which the assessment is relevant to the workplace and the evidence identified is
valued by stakeholders (e.g., service users and families, staff, regulators/commissioners).

Before undertaking the assessment, organisations may want to consider a few key questions:

1. What is the purpose of the observation/assessment?

2. Who is best placed to undertake the observation/assessment?

3. Do assessors need any preparation and/or support?

4. How and when will the observation/assessment take place?

5. How will the summary of findings be collated and shared?

6. How will areas for improvement be agreed upon and implemented?

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 2

Whilst all observation methods have particular strengths and weaknesses, the self-assessment tool does not
specify any particular approach as it is the organisation’s responsibility to consider which approach will best fit
their circumstances and services. A number of methods can be used to assess performance including direct
observations; oral questions, surveys or interviews; written reports, policies or guidance; service user information
such as behaviour support plans, advance directives or person-centred plans; case studies; training records;
internal audits; and regulatory inspection reports. Assessors should be prepared to use a mixture of assessment
methods and should endeavour to triangulate evidence using two or more sources so that there is a degree of
confidence in relation to any specific aspect of organisational performance identified.

LAYOUT
Based on a review of published literature between 2004 and 2010, the self-assessment tool is presented in the
form of a simple checklist structured around Huckshorn’s Six Core Strategies (2005) which have been shown to
enable organisations to eliminate or significantly minimise coercion and restrictive practices.

When undertaking the assessment, there is a criteria statement under each of the Core Strategies against which
observed evidence is gathered or established so that the assessor can give a rating. The rating should be seen
as a confidence ‘score’ which illustrates the extent to which the assessor believes the organisation implements a
specific approach. It is important to note that during the assessment, it is not the role of the assessor to determine
what, if and how any improvements can or should be made as this responsibility lies with the team, department or
organisation.

PROCESS
Organisations should consider a suitable approach to assessing performance which best reflects the needs of
their service. Whilst the self-assessment checklist provides the assessment criteria for assessors to observe or
ask questions, organisations should also consider who to ask, how to ask, when to ask, factors that may positively
or negatively influence the responses people give or the observations made, as well as how the assessment
information will be collated and used in feedback.

When undertaking the assessment, a number of approaches can be used including:

1. Self-Assessment
Individual teams or departments can be asked to undertake a self-assessment in order to give greater
control and responsibility by engaging with the assessment criteria, becoming more active in their learning
and taking ownership of their performance.

Self-assessment and developing effective reflective skills are essential elements of restraint reduction that
can help teams or departments to have a better understanding of exactly what is expected so that they can
clearly identify what they do well (and can be celebrated) and what they may wish to improve.

2. Peer Assessment
Peer assessment involves one team or department taking responsibility for assessing the performance of
another team or department. It is a powerful way to increase motivation and engagement. Peer assessment
can encourage deeper understanding and learning of the assessment criteria and can allow departments
to gain an understanding of how their peers implement or operationalise different approaches. Whilst peer
assessors are often the harshest critics, they are also very good at identifying good practice and everyday
examples of positive outcomes that their peers may overlook.

3. Service User and Family Assessment

Working together to increase understanding of service users’ and families’ experiences and ensuring
the differing views of service users and families are collected and used to improve performance is a
considerable challenge but one which brings many benefits to organisations. Gaining service user and
family feedback on performance can have an effect on how services are planned, organised and delivered,
which in turn can have a positive effect on care outcomes by making services more responsive to people’s
individual needs.

The National Centre for Involvement (2008) provides a number of guiding principles for service user
involvement but in particular emphasises that honesty, in terms of what can and can’t be changed, and
feedback are two critical elements in the process.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 3

SCORES
A simple assessment score is used to determine how well the organisation is perceived to be implementing
a particular approach based on the assessor’s observations and triangulation of evidence. Once a judgement
is made, the score is entered against the criteria and an overall score is calculated for each section. The score
can be taken from each section of the assessment tool and collated at the end to give an overall picture of the
organisation’s performance:

Criteria Ranking Score

This score is given to illustrate that the assessors believe that a particular approach is fully
embedded into everyday working practice, values and culture. It would be an exception to Yes 5
find this approach not being implemented.
This score is given to illustrate that the assessors believe that some or all of a particular
approach does happen, but it is not fully embedded into working practice, values and Partly 3
culture.
This score is given to illustrate that the assessors believe that a particular approach has
No 1
been newly implemented and is not embedded in working practice, values and culture.
This score is given to illustrate that the assessors believe that a particular approach does not
N/A 0
happen; or is not relevant to this team, department, organisation or service user group.

FEEDBACK
Once the assessment is complete, the organisation should consider how they will report the findings to
stakeholders and how they will decide to identify those areas of performance which will become part of an
improvement plan. Giving feedback is important and has greater credibility and validity to stakeholders (e.g.,
service users and families, staff, regulators and commissioners) when provided immediately after the assessment.
Careful consideration should be given to when feedback is given and to whom, as well as how feedback is
presented. Immediate or real-time feedback to stakeholders provides organisations with the opportunity to
increase responsiveness by outlining how improvements will be made in order to drive quality and keep the focus
on continuous improvement.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 4

Assessment Criteria
Strategy 1: LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE > The organisation develops a mission, vision and set of guiding values which
promote non-coercion and the avoidance of restrictive practices.

Score
Criteria
Yes Partly No N/A

The organisation has a current restraint reduction strategy which outlines a range of
multi-strategic approaches to reduce coercive approaches and to prevent the misuse and
abuse of restraint.

The restraint reduction strategy supports the organisation’s mission, vision and values and
emphasises the importance of person-centred care, compassion and dignity.

The restraint reduction strategy directly evidences approaches which meet national,
service-specific and regulatory guidelines and standards.

The restraint reduction strategy is based around the RRN’s Six Core Strategies and
addresses restraint reduction across the entire organisation (service, department, team,
individual service user).

Service user and family views are considered and integrated into the reduction plan.

The restraint reduction strategy is communicated across the organisation and shared with
stakeholders (service users and families, staff, commissioners, regulators).

Restraint reduction is supported by strong, visible leadership. A senior manager is named

as a lead for restraint reduction, and service users and families know who to speak to if
they have concerns.

The organisation’s Senior Management Team and Board receives regular reports on the
organisation’s performance in relation to restraint reduction.

There is an effective governance framework and policy in relation to the use of restrictive
practices to ensure restraint is not misused or abused.

There is a clear and transparent complaints procedure specific to the use of restrictive
practices which enables service users, families and staff to raise concerns regarding the
use of restraint.

The organisation’s policy on the use of restrictive practices provides clear and
unambiguous criteria outlining when restrictive practice may be considered an
appropriate and reasonable intervention.

Leaders and managers promote a culture of care and compassion and inspire staff to
build open and positive relationships with service users and families.

The prevailing culture in the organisation emphasises that the use of restraint is a
‘treatment failure’. Whenever restrictive practices are implemented, there is a clear
approach which shows how staff will attempt to ensure further restraint is avoided in the
future.

The misuse and abuse of restrictive practices is consistently addressed by leaders and
managers.
Raw Mean (Raw/14)
TOTAL SCORE
Add all scores above for Raw Score. Divide by 14 for Mean.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

Strategy 1: LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE > In order of priority, list the potential areas for improvement.

1.

2.

3.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 5

 Strategy 2: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT > The organisation uses a ‘systems thinking’ approach and identifies the key
performance measures.

Score
Criteria
Yes Partly No N/A

The organisation clearly sets out the measures that are used to determine the level of
performance in relation to restraint and restraint reduction.

The measures used are valid and the data captured takes account of the varying number
of users accessing the service (e.g., incident rates are expressed as a rate per number of
service users; rates per number of care hours/days delivered).

The measures used capture the use of all restrictive practices to ensure a reduction in one
method of restrictive intervention is not substituted for an increase in another.

The organisation has an approach to incident reporting and recording which accurately
captures measures of performance.

Data is captured and used to inform the organisation about performance in relation to the
specified measures.

Data is shared at all levels within the organisation so that everyone is aware of the
organisation’s performance (organisational, department, team and individual level).

Data is used non-punitively to understand organisational performance and to highlight

achievements and successes so that good practice is shared.

Data is used non-punitively to understand organisational performance and to identify

potential areas for improvement.

Data is used non-punitively to identify potential areas of conflict that lead to restrictive
practices being used so that preventative measures can be maintained or implemented in
order to avoid or minimise such conflict.

Data is provided to and used by staff to help them understand the needs of each person
they support.
Raw Mean (Raw/10)
TOTAL SCORE
Add all scores above for Raw Score. Divide by 10 for Mean.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

Strategy 2: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT > In order of priority, list the potential areas for improvement.

2.

3.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 6

 Strategy 3: LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT > The organisation ensures its workforce has the necessary knowledge and
skills to improve workplace performance.

Score
Criteria
Yes Partly No N/A

The organisation has a workforce development plan which sets out the training required
to develop and maintain the knowledge and skills staff need to support service users
effectively.

As part of the workforce development plan, staff receive an appropriate level of training in
person-centred values, recovery and restraint reduction.

As part of the workforce development plan, staff receive an appropriate level of training in
Positive Behaviour Support.

As part of the workforce development plan, staff receive training in a range of

preventative measures which focus on conflict avoidance and resolution including:
• Understanding the nature and cause of conflict, aggression and violence.
• Effective interpersonal skills.
• Effective listening skills.
• Verbal de-escalation.
• Trauma-informed care.
• Delivering person-centred support.
• Collaborative problem solving.
• Risk assessment and positive risk taking.
• Debriefing.

As part of the workforce development plan, staff receive training in crisis prevention and
management, including the use of physical interventions where required.

Staff training is accredited and/or linked to national or sector-specific guidance.

Staff training provides evidence of competence which enables the organisation to deliver
outcomes which meet national, regulatory or sector-specific guidance.

Staff receive effective ongoing supervision, support and workplace coaching to ensure
learning is transferred into practice.

The organisation implements an ongoing training cycle which ensures that staff maintain
their competencies and continue to develop their knowledge and skills.

Staff receive workplace support which enables them to apply their learning to the specific
needs of individuals they support.
Raw Mean (Raw/10)
TOTAL SCORE
Add all scores above for Raw Score. Divide by 10 for Mean.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

Strategy 3: LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT > In order of priority, list the potential areas for improvement.

1.

2.

3.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 7

 Strategy 4: PERSONALISED SUPPORT > Staff focus on providing personalised support that ‘works’ for individuals using services.

Score
Criteria
Yes Partly No N/A

Service users are fully involved in planning their individualised care and support.

Each service user has an individual behaviour support plan which outlines how flexible
and responsive support is provided at a primary and secondary preventative level so that
potential conflict or crisis situations can be avoided.

The primary and secondary interventions in each service user’s support plan focus on
approaches which help the person to address factors that impact on their behaviour
(e.g., physical and mental well-being; personal, social and environmental factors; coping
strategies; occupation).

A formal risk assessment is used to determine those individuals who are likely to present
crisis behaviour which is a risk to self or others.

Where risk behaviours are identified, each service user’s behaviour support plan outlines
how flexible and responsive crisis intervention and post-crisis support will be delivered.

Where restrictive practices are used to manage crisis behaviour, individual service user
risks assessments are completed to ensure the welfare, safety and dignity of the individual
is maintained.

Staff are routinely briefed on each user’s behaviour support plan and know how to
implement the service user’s preferred strategies to avoid or minimise conflict and how to
safely implement restrictive practices if required.

Behaviour support plans are trauma-sensitive and trauma-informed so the specific needs
of each service user are identified and supported.

All restrictive practices are considered and planned around the needs of individual
service users in order to maintain their welfare, safety and dignity. Universal or blanket
restrictions are not applied unless supported by a risk assessment and appropriate
guidance which considers the welfare, safety and dignity of all users; e.g. restricting
materials which pose a fire hazard (matches, cigarette lighters).

The environment promotes a culture of care, welfare, safety and collaboration. There is
a calm and positive culture which promotes interpersonal connections between service
users and staff.

Service users have access to quiet areas or sensory rooms where they can go as an
alternative to seclusion.

All incidents of restrictive practice are reviewed by the team in partnership with the
service user so that everyone gains a better understanding of what happened and what
can be addressed in the future so that conflict can be avoided and future restrictive
interventions minimised.

There is a non-punitive external review* of all incidents which helps everyone to gain a
better understanding of performance in order to improve personalised support so that
the use of restrictive practices can be avoided in the future.
*The term ‘external review’ is used to indicate that the review involves someone not
directly involved in the incident. This can be another team member, line manager or
advocate; or it may include individuals or teams from external departments or agencies.
Raw Mean (Raw/13)
TOTAL SCORE
Add all scores above for Raw Score. Divide by 13 for Mean.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

Strategy 4: PERSONALISED SUPPORT > In order of priority, list the potential areas for improvement.

1.

2.

3.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 8

 Strategy 5: CUSTOMER INVOLVEMENT > The organisation fully involves the people who use services and establishes a clear
understanding of their needs.

Score
Criteria
Yes Partly No N/A

Organisations clearly communicate the range of restrictive practices authorised and

approved for use within the service. Clear information is given to service users and families
which outlines the circumstances when restrictive practices can be used, including how to
complain when service users and families are unhappy about the use of restraint.

Organisations involve service users and families in developing their restraint reduction
strategy.

Organisations ensure that best practice in restraint reduction focuses on the specific
needs of individuals and ensures that the potential for discriminatory bias (e.g., as a result
of age, gender, race, religion) in the use of restrictive practice is avoided.

Service users are recruited as advocates, experts by experience and workplace

champions to promote the restraint reduction strategy within the service.

Organisations implement strategies which engage and empower service users to

determine the care and support they need so that conflict and the use of restrictive
practices are avoided.

Service users are involved in the co-delivery of training to staff on the use of restrictive
practices.

Service users are involved in establishing communal rules which enable people living in
shared environments to avoid or minimise conflict.

Debriefing is always offered/provided to service users when any restrictive practice is

implemented.

Where it is difficult for the service user to engage in debriefing, debriefing is augmented
to the needs of the individual.

Outcomes of debriefing are used to enable collaborative action with service users and
staff to develop more effective personal support and behavioural management strategies.

Organisations share their performance with service users and families so that everyone
knows the successes achieved and any key areas for improvement.
Raw Mean (Raw/11)
TOTAL SCORE
Add all scores above for Raw Score. Divide by 11 for Mean.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

Strategy 5: CUSTOMER INVOLVEMENT > In order of priority, list the potential areas for improvement.

1.

2.

3.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 9

 Strategy 6: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT > The organisation adopts a culture of reflection and learning in order to improve
how it operates.

Score
Criteria
Yes Partly No N/A

The organisation has a systematic process and management method for improving,
building and sustaining performance in relation to conflict avoidance and restraint
reduction.

Continuous improvement in relation to conflict avoidance and restraint reduction occurs

at an organisational, team and individual service user level.

The organisation’s governance arrangements ensure the use of all restrictive practices
is scrutinised so that efforts to prevent or minimise restrictive practices are continually
implemented and evaluated.

The organisation uses assessment tools which give an indication of staff attitudes towards
restraint reduction and the level of care and compassion afforded to service users subject
to restrictive practices.

Project teams are established to help the organisation find successful improvement
strategies to reduce conflict and the use of restrictive practices.

The organisation provides staff with simple tools and techniques to understand workplace
performance and how to make improvements to the quality of service delivered.

There is a culture of candour. The organisation accepts when things go wrong and shows
a commitment to improve.
Raw Mean (Raw/7)
TOTAL SCORE
Add all scores above for Raw Score. Divide by 7 for Mean.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

Strategy 6: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT > In order of priority, list the potential areas for improvement.

1.

2.

3.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 10

Shade in the approximate mean score for each strategy in the chart below.

Leadersh 1
6 mp
rovement ip a
nd
I Go
ous ve
u
5 5
in

rn
nt

an
4
Co

ce
3 3

Per
2 2
t

form
mer Involvemen

1 1

ance Manage
2
5
4
3
2
1
1
2
3
4
5
5

1
o

1
t

m
s

2
Cu

e
2

nt
3 3
4

Le
4

ar
rt

5 ni
o

n
5
g
p

an
Sup dD
d eve
nalise lopm 3
Perso
4 ent

This year we are committed to improving the following aspects of our service:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 11

Bibliography and Resources
Allen, M.H. & Currier, G.W. 2004, “Use of restraints and Bowers, L., Allan, T., Simpson, A., Jones, J. & Whittington, R. 2009,
pharmacotherapy in academic psychiatric emergency services”, “Morale is high in acute inpatient psychiatry”, Social Psychiatry &
General Hospital Psychiatry, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 42-49. Psychiatric Epidemiology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 39-46.
Amering, M., Stastny, P. & Hopper, K. 2005, “Psychiatric advance Bowers, L., Van Der Merwe, M., Nijman, H., Hamilton, B., Noorthorn,
directives: Qualitative study of informed deliberations by mental E., Stewart, D. & Muir-Cochrane, E. 2010, “The practice of
health service users”, The British Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 186, no. seclusion and time-out on English acute psychiatric wards: The
3, pp. 247-252. City-128 Study”, Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, vol. 24, no. 4, pp.
275-286.
Ashcraft, L. & Anthony, W. 2008, “Eliminating seclusion and restraint
in recovery-oriented crisis services”, Psychiatric Services, vol. 59, Bowers, L., Van Der Merwe, M., Paterson, B. & Stewart, D. 2012,
no. 10, pp. 1198-1202. “Manual restraint and shows of force: The City-128 study”,
International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, vol. 21, no. 1, pp.
Azeem, M.W., Aujla, A., Rammerth, M., Binsfeld, G. & Jones, R.B.
30-40.
2011, “Effectiveness of six core strategies based on trauma
informed care in reducing seclusions and restraints at a child and Bridgett, D.J., Valentino, K. & Hayden, L.C. 2012, “The contribution
adolescent psychiatric hospital”, Journal of Child & Adolescent of children’s temperamental fear and effortful control to restraint
Psychiatric Nursing, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 11-15. and seclusion during inpatient treatment in a psychiatric hospital”,
Child Psychiatry and Human Development, vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 821-
Badger, F. & Mullan, B. 2004, “Aggressive and violent incidents:
836.
Perceptions of training and support among staff caring for older
people and people with head injury”, Journal of Clinical Nursing, Browne, V., Knott, J., Dakis, J., Fielding, J., Lyle, D., Daniel, C., Bruce,
vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 526-533. M. & Virtue, E. 2011, “Improving the care of mentally ill patients in
a tertiary emergency department: Development of a psychiatric
Barton, S.A., Johnson, M.R. & Price, L.V. 2009, “Achieving restraint-free
assessment and planning unit”, Australasian Psychiatry, vol. 19, no.
on an inpatient behavioral health unit”, Journal of Psychosocial
4, pp. 350-353.
Nursing & Mental Health Services, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 34-40.
Butterworth, R. & Harbison, I. 2011, “Restraint and never events: An
Beech, B. & Leather, P. 2006, “Workplace violence in the health
opportunity for change”, Mental Health Practice, vol. 15, no. 1, pp.
care sector: A review of staff training and integration of training
30-32.
evaluation models”, Aggression and Violent Behavior, vol. 11, no.
1, pp. 27-43. Carson, G. 2010, “Restraint put on hold”, Community Care, no. 1837,
pp. 20-21.
Bellonci, C., Huefner, J.C., Griffith, A.K., Vogel-Rosen, G., Smith,
G.L. & Preston, S. 2013, “Concurrent reductions in psychotropic Champagne, T. & Stromberg, N. 2004, “Sensory approaches in
medication, assault, and physical restraint in two residential inpatient psychiatric settings: Innovative alternatives to seclusion
treatment programs for youth”, Children and Youth Services & restraint”, Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health
Review, vol. 35, no. 10, pp. 1773-1779. Services, vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 34.
Benson, R., Miller, G., Rogers, P. & Allen, J. 2012, “Strategies to Chan, C. & Chung, C. 2005, “A retrospective study of seclusion in
prevent restraint-related deaths”, Mental Health Practice, vol. 15, an emergency department”, Hong Kong Journal of Emergency
no. 7, pp. 32-35. Medicine, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 6-13.
Bonner, G. 2007. The psychological impact of restraint in acute Chandler, G. 2012, “Reducing use of restraints and seclusion to
mental health settings: The experiences of staff and inpatients. create a culture of safety”, Journal of Psychosocial Nursing &
Retrieved from http://vistas.uwl.ac.uk/417/1/Gwen_Bonner_-_ Mental Health Services, vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 29-36.
Phd.pdf
Chilvers, J., Thomas, C. & Stanbury, A. 2011, “The impact of a ward-
Borckardt, J.J., Madan, A., Grubaugh, A.L., Danielson, C.K., Pelic, based mindfulness programme on recorded aggression in a
C.G., Hardesty, S.J., Hanson, R., Herbert, J., Cooney, H. & Benson, medium secure facility for women with learning disabilities”,
A. 2011, “Systematic investigation of initiatives to reduce Journal of Learning Disabilities and Offending Behaviour, vol. 2,
seclusion and restraint in a state psychiatric hospital”, Psychiatric no. 1, pp. 27-41.
Services, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 477-483.
Ching, H., Daffern, M., Martin, T. & Thomas, S. 2010, “Reducing the
Boumans, C.E., Egger, J.I.M., Souren, P.M. & Hutschemaekers, G.J.M. use of seclusion in a forensic psychiatric hospital: Assessing the
2014, “Reduction in the use of seclusion by the methodical work impact on aggression, therapeutic climate and staff confidence”,
approach”, International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, vol. 23, Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, vol. 21, no. 5, pp.
no. 2, pp. 161-170. 737-760.
Bowers, L., Brennan, G., Flood, C., Lipang, M. & Oladapo, P. Clarke, Z. 2011, “Finding alternatives to restraint: A team of
2006, “Preliminary outcomes of a trial to reduce conflict and champions in Sheffield, set up to guide service providers on
containment on acute psychiatric wards: City Nurses”, Journal of referrals for restraint, has done much to raise awareness of the
Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 165-172. issues involved. Zara Clarke discusses the progress of the project”,
Learning Disability Practice, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 21-23.
Bowers, L., Alexander, J., Bilgin, H., Botha, M., Dack, C., James, K.,
Jarrett, M., Jeffery, D., Nijman, H. & Owiti, J. 2013, “Safewards: The Colton, D. 2004, Checklist for assessing your organization’s readiness
empirical basis of the model and a critical appraisal”, Journal of for reducing seclusion and restraint. Retrieved July 2014 from
Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. http://www.nm.stir.ac.uk/documents/ld-restraint-reduction-paper.
pdf
Bowers, L., Ross, J., Owiti, J., Baker, J., Adams, C. & Stewart, D.
2012, “Event sequencing of forced intramuscular medication in Cummings, K., Grandfield, S.A., & Coldwell, C.M. 2010, “Caring
England”, Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, vol. with comfort rooms: Reducing seclusion and restraint use in
19, no. 9, pp. 799-806. psychiatric facilities “, Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental
Health Services, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 26-30.
Bowers, L. 2014, “A model of de-escalation”, Mental Health Practice,
vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 36-37.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 12

Curran, S.S. 2007, “Staff resistance to restraint reduction: Identifying Gaskin, C.J., McVilly, K.R. & McGillivray, J.A. 2013, “Initiatives to
and overcoming barriers”, Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & reduce the use of seclusion and restraints on people with
Mental Health Services, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 45. developmental disabilities: A systematic review and quantitative
synthesis”, Research in Developmental Disabilities, vol. 34, no. 11,
Dahan, S., Levi, G., Behrbalk, P., Melamed, Y. & Bleich, A. 2007, “Born
pp. 3946-3961.
to be free: The influence of raising the awareness of the nursing
staff to the reduction of the use of physical restraints on restraint Georgieva, I., de Haan, G., Smith, W. & Mulder, C.L. 2010, “Successful
orders, hours of restraint and the numbers of patients restrained – reduction of seclusion in a newly developed psychiatric intensive
a retrospective study”, BMC Psychiatry, vol. 7, pp. 1-1. care unit”, Journal of Psychiatric Intensive Care, vol. 6, no. 1, pp.
31-38.
Day, A., Daffern, M., & Simmons, P. 2010, “Use of restraint in
residential care settings for children and young people”, Georgieva, I., Mulder, C.L. & Whittington, R. 2012, “Evaluation of
Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 230-244. behavioral changes and subjective distress after exposure to
coercive inpatient interventions”, BMC Psychiatry, vol. 12.
Dean, A.J., Duke, S.G., George, M. & Scott, J. 2007, “Behavioral
management leads to reduction in aggression in a child and Gerolamo, A.M. 2006, “The conceptualization of physical restraint
adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit”, Journal of the American as a nursing-sensitive adverse outcome in acute care psychiatric
Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 711- treatment settings”, Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, vol. 20, no. 4,
720. pp. 175-185.
Delaney, K.R. 2006, “Evidence base for practice: Reduction Gibson, R., Novakovic, A., Francis, K., McGilloway, K., Adkin, A.,
of restraint and seclusion use during child and adolescent & Odekunle, S. 2008. “Service evaluation of multidisciplinary
psychiatric inpatient treatment”, Worldviews on Evidence-Based therapy on an acute psychiatric ward”, The Mental Health Review,
Nursing, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 19-30. vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 32-39.
Deveau, R. & McDonnell, A. 2009, “As the last resort: Reducing the Gold, H. A. 2011, “Restraining restraints: Decreasing the use of
use of restrictive physical interventions using organisational restraints on individuals with special needs”. Retrieved from
approaches”, British Journal of Learning Disabilities, vol. 37, no. 3, http://csus-dspace.calstate.edu/handle/10211.9/1312
pp. 172-177.
Greene, R., Ablon, J.S., Hassuk, B., Regan, K.M., & Martin, A. 2006,
Donat, D.C. 2005, “Special section on seclusion and restraint: “Innovations: Child & adolescent psychiatry: Use of collaborative
Encouraging alternatives to seclusion, restraint, and reliance on problem solving to reduce seclusion and restraint in child and
PRN drugs in a public psychiatric hospital”, Psychiatric Services, adolescent inpatient units”, Psychiatric Services, vol. 57, no. 5, pp.
vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 1105-1108. 610-612.
Donat, D.C. 2006, “Impact of a clinical-administrative review Griffiths, J. & Wilcox, D. 2013, “Positive behaviour support in a
procedure on reducing reliance on psychotropic PRN medium secure environment”, Mental Health Practice, vol. 16, no.
medication”, Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 10, pp. 24-27.
215-218.
Happell, B. & Harrow, A. 2010, “Nurses’ attitudes to the use of
D’Orio, B.M., Purselle, D., Stevens, D. & Garlow, S.J. 2004, “Reduction seclusion: A review of the literature”, International Journal of
of episodes of seclusion and restraint in a psychiatric emergency Mental Health Nursing, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 162-168.
service”, Psychiatric Services, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 581-583.
Hoekstra, T., Lendemeijer, H. & Jansen, M. 2004, “Seclusion: The
Downes, M.A., Healy, P., Page, C.B., Bryant, J.L. & Isbister, G.K. inside story”, Journal of Psychiatric & Mental Health Nursing, vol.
2009, “Structured team approach to the agitated patient in the 11, no. 3, pp. 276-283.
emergency department”, Emergency Medicine Australasia, vol.
Hollins, L. & Stubbs, B. 2011, “Managing the risks associated with
21, no. 3, pp. 196-202.
physical intervention: A discussion paper”, The British Journal of
Downey, L.V., Zun, L.S. & Gonzales, S.J. 2007, “Frequency of Forensic Practice, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 257-263.
alternative to restraints and seclusion and uses of agitation
Holstead, J., Lamond, D., Dalton, J., Horne, A. & Crick, R. 2010,
reduction techniques in the emergency department”, General
“Restraint reduction in children’s residential facilities:
Hospital Psychiatry, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 470-474.
Implementation at Damar Services”, Residential Treatment for
Duxbury, J., Aiken, F. & Dale, C. 2011, “Deaths in custody: The role Children & Youth, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 1-13.
of restraint”, Journal of Learning Disabilities and Offending
Huckshorn, K. 2008, “Six Core Strategies for Reducing Seclusion and
Behaviour, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 178-189.
Restraint Use”. Alexandria, VA: NASMHPD (National Association of
Duxbury, J. & Paterson, B. 2005, “The use of physical restraint in State Mental Health Program Directors).
mental health nursing: An examination of principles, practice and
Huckshorn, K. 2006, “Re-designing state mental health policy to
implications for training”, Journal of Adult Protection, vol. 7, no. 4,
prevent the use of seclusion and restraint”, Administration and
pp. 13-24.
Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, vol.
Dye, S., Brown, S. & Chhina, N. 2009, “Seclusion and restraint usage 33, no. 4, pp. 482-91.
in seven English psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs)”, Journal
Huckshorn, K.A. 2004, “Reducing seclusion & restraint use in mental
of Psychiatric Intensive Care, vol. 5, no. 02, pp. 69-79.
health settings: Core strategies for prevention”, Journal of
Farrell, G. & Cubit, K. 2005, “Nurses under threat: A comparison of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health Services, vol. 42, no. 9, pp.
content of 28 aggression management programs”, International 22.
Journal of Mental Health Nursing, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 44-53.
Huf, G., Coutinho, E.S.F. & Adams, C.E. 2012, “Physical restraints
Flannery Jr, R.B., Farley, E., Rego, S. & Walker, A.P. 2007, versus seclusion room for management of people with acute
“Characteristics of staff victims of psychiatric patient assaults: aggression or agitation due to psychotic illness (TREC-SAVE):
15-year analysis of the Assaulted Staff Action Program (ASAP)”, a randomized trial”, Psychological Medicine, vol. 42, no. 11, pp.
Psychiatric Quarterly, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 25-37. 2265-73.
Gaskin, C.J., Elsom, S.J. & Happell, B. 2007, “Interventions for Hyde, S., Fulbrook, P., Fenton, K. & Kilshaw, M. 2009, “A clinical
reducing the use of seclusion in psychiatric facilities: Review of the improvement project to develop and implement a decision-
literature”, The British Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 191, pp. 298-303. making framework for the use of seclusion”, International Journal
of Mental Health Nursing, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 398-408.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 13

Jankovic, J., Richards, F. & Priebe, S. 2010, “Advance statements in LeBel, J. 2014, “First randomised controlled-trial research on
adult mental health”, Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, vol. 16, seclusion and restraint reduction achieves intent”, Evidence-Based
no. 6, pp. 448-455. Mental Health, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 40-41.
Janssen, W., Noorthoorn, E., Linge, R.V. & Lendemeijer, B. 2007, “The Lee, S., Gray, R. & Gournay, K. 2012, “Comparing the outcomes of the
influence of staffing levels on the use of seclusion”, International application of C&R (general service) and SCIP in the management
Journal of Law and Psychiatry, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 118-126. of disturbed behaviour in mental health care”, Journal of Mental
Health, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 307-317.
Johnson, M.E. 2010, “Violence and restraint reduction efforts on
inpatient psychiatric units”, Issues in Mental Health Nursing, vol. Lepping, P., Steinert, T., Needham, I., Abderhalden, C., Flammer, E.
31, no. 3, pp. 181-197. & Schmid, P. 2009, “Ward safety perceived by ward managers in
Britain, Germany and Switzerland: Identifying factors that improve
Jones, E., Allen, D., Moore, K., Phillips, B. & Lowe, K. 2007, “Restraint
ability to deal with violence.” Journal of Psychiatric and Mental
and self-injury in people with intellectual disabilities: A review”,
Health Nursing, vol. 16, pp. 629-635.
Journal of Intellectual Disabilities: JOID, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 105-
118. Letizia, M., Babler, C. & Cockrell, A. 2004, “Repeating the call for
restraint reduction”, MEDSURG Nursing, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 9-13.
Jones, P. & Kroese, B.S. 2007, “Service users’ views of physical
restraint procedures in secure settings for people with learning Lewis, M., Taylor, K. & Parks, J. 2009, “Crisis prevention management:
disabilities”, British Journal of Learning Disabilities, vol. 35, no. 1, A program to reduce the use of seclusion and restraint in an
pp. 50-54. inpatient mental health setting”, Issues in Mental Health Nursing,
vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 159-164.
Jonikas, J.A., Cook, J.A., Rosen, C., Laris, A. & Kim, J. 2004, “Brief
reports: A program to reduce use of physical restraint in Luiselli, J.K. 2009, “Physical restraint of people with intellectual
psychiatric inpatient facilities”, Psychiatric Services, vol. 55, no. 7, disability: A review of implementation reduction and elimination
pp. 818-820. procedures”, Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual
Disabilities, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 126-134.
Kelley, E.C. 2014, “Reducing violence in the emergency department:
A rapid response team approach”, Journal of Emergency Nursing, Luiselli, J.K., Dunn, E.K. & Pace, G.M. 2005, “Antecedent assessment
vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 60-64. and intervention to reduce physical restraint (protective holding)
of children and adolescents with acquired brain injury”, Behavioral
Keski-Valkama, A., Sailas, E., Eronen, M., Koivisto, A. M., Lönnqvist,
Interventions, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 51-65.
J., & Kaltiala-Heino, R. 2010. “The reasons for using restraint and
seclusion in psychiatric inpatient care: A nationwide 15-year Lundström, M., Antonsson, H., Karlsson, S. & Graneheim, U. 2011,
study”. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 136-144. “Use of physical restraints with people with intellectual disabilities
living in Sweden’s group homes”, Journal of Policy & Practice in
Khadivi, A.N., Patel, R.C., Atkinson, A.R. & Levine, J.M. 2004,
Intellectual Disabilities, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 36-41.
“Association between seclusion and restraint and patient-related
violence”, Psychiatric Services, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 1311-1312. MacDaniel, M. 2009, “Comfort rooms”, New York State Office of
Mental Health, Office of Quality Management. Retrieved 1.7.14
Kindy, D., Petersen, S. & Parkhurst, D. 2005, “Perilous work: Nurses’
from https://www.omh.ny.gov/omhweb/resources/publications/
experiences in psychiatric units with high risks of assault”, Archives
comfort_room/
of Psychiatric Nursing, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 169-175.
Macpherson, R., Dix, R. & Morgan, S. 2005, “A growing evidence
Knox, D.K. & Holloman, G.H., Jr 2012, “Use and avoidance of
base for management guidelines: Revisiting guidelines for the
seclusion and restraint: Consensus statement of the American
management of acutely disturbed psychiatric patients”, Advances
association for emergency psychiatry project Beta seclusion
in Psychiatric Treatment, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 404-415.
and restraint workgroup”, The Western Journal of Emergency
Medicine, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 35-40. Maguire, T., Young, R. & Martin, T. 2012, “Seclusion reduction in a
forensic mental health setting”, Journal of Psychiatric & Mental
Kontio, R., Välimäki, M., Putkonen, H., Cocoman, A., Turpeinen,
Health Nursing, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 97-106.
S., Kuosmanen, L. & Joffe, G. 2009, “Nurses’ and physicians’
educational needs in seclusion and restraint practices”, Markwell, S.K. 2005, “Long-term restraint reduction: One hospital’s
Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 198-207. experience with restraint alternatives”, Journal of Nursing Care
Quality, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 253-260.
Kontio, R., Välimäki, M., Putkonen, H., Kuosmanen, L., Scott, A. & Joffe,
G. 2010, “Patient restrictions: Are there ethical alternatives to Marrow, M.T., Knudsen, K.J., Olafson, E. & Bucher, S.E. 2012, “The
seclusion and restraint?” Nursing Ethics, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 65-76. Value of Implementing TARGET within a Trauma-Informed
Juvenile Justice Setting”, Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma,
Kronstorfer, R. 2007, Definition and use of coercive measures in old
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 257-270.
age psychiatry settings in Germany and Wales, BioMed Central.
Martin, A., Krieg, H., Esposito, F., Stubbe, D. & Cardona, L. 2008,
Kynoch, K., Wu, C. & Chang, A., M. 2011, “Interventions for
“Reduction of restraint and seclusion through collaborative
preventing and managing aggressive patients admitted to an
problem solving: A five-year prospective inpatient study”,
acute hospital setting: A systematic review”, Worldviews on
Psychiatric Services, vol. 59, no. 12, pp. 1406-1412.
Evidence-Based Nursing, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 76-86.
Mental Health Commission, Ireland. 2012. “Seclusion and Physical
Laker, C., Gray, R. & Flach, C. 2010, “Case study evaluating the impact
Restraint Reduction. Knowledge Review and Draft Strategy”.
of de-escalation and physical intervention training”, Journal of
Retrieved July 2014 from www.mhcirl.ie/File/SecandPPR_
Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 222-228.
KnowRev.pdf
Larue, C., Dumais, A., Ahern, E., Bernheim, E. & Mailhot, M. 2009,
McClean, B., Dench, C., Grey, I., Shanahan, S., Fitzsimons, E.,
“Factors influencing decisions on seclusion and restraint”, Journal
Hendler, J. & Corrigan, M. 2005, “Person Focused Training: A
of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 440-
model for delivering positive behavioural supports to people
446.
with challenging behaviours”, Journal of Intellectual Disability
LeBel, J., Nunno, M. A., Mohr, W. K., & O’Halloran, R. 2012. “Restraint Research, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 340-352.
and seclusion use in US school settings: Recommendations from
allied treatment disciplines”, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,
vol. 82, no. 1, p. 75.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 14

McCue, R.E., Urcuyo, L., Lilu, Y., Tobias, T. & Chambers, M.J. 2004, Raboch, J., Kališová, L., Nawka, A., Kitzlerová, E., Onchev, G.,
“Reducing restraint use in a public psychiatric inpatient service”, Karastergiou, A., Magliano, L., Dembinskas, A., Kiejna, A. & Torres-
Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, vol. 31, no. 2, Gonzales, F. 2010, “Use of coercive measures during involuntary
pp. 217-224. hospitalization: Findings from ten European countries”, Psychiatric
Services, vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 1012-1017.
McKenzie, K., Powell, H. & McGregor, L. 2004, “The impact of control
and restraint training on nursing students”, Learning Disability Roberton, T., Daffern, M., Thomas, S. & Martin, T. 2012, “De-escalation
Practice, vol. 7, no. 9, pp. 34-37. and limit-setting in forensic mental health units”, Journal of
Forensic Nursing, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 94-101.
Miller, G., Paterson, B., Benson, R. & Rogers, P. 2007, “Violence
reduction in mental health and criminal justice: Recent and Robson, D. & Gray, R. 2007, “Serious mental illness and physical
current developments”, The Journal of Mental Health Training, health problems: A discussion paper”, International Journal of
Education and Practice, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 28-41. Nursing Studies, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 457-466.
Miller, J.A., Hunt, D.P. & Georges, M.A. 2006, “Reduction of physical Romijn, A. & Frederiks, B.J.M. 2012, “Restriction on restraints in the
restraints in residential treatment facilities”, Journal of Disability care for people with intellectual disabilities in the Netherlands:
Policy Studies, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 202-208. Lessons learned from Australia, UK, and United States”, Journal
of Policy & Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, vol. 9, no. 2, pp.
National Centre for Involvement. 2008, Retrieved from
127-133.
healthwatchgloucestershire.co.uk/docs/nci%20governance.pdf
Russell, M., Maher, C., Dorrell, M., Pitcher, C. & Henderson, L. 2009, “A
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 2014,
comparison between users and non-users of Devereux’s Safe and
“ESUOM28: Rapid tranquillisation in mental health settings:
Positive Approaches Training Curricula in the reduction of injury
promethazine hydrochloride”. Retrieved from https://
and restraint”, Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, vol. 26,
www.nice.org.uk/guidance/esuom28/resources/rapid-
no. 3, pp. 209-220.
tranquillisation-in-mental-health-settings-promethazine-
hydrochloride-54116459008294597 Ryan, J.B., Peterson, R., Tetreault, G. & Hagen, E.V. 2007, “Reducing
seclusion timeout and restraint procedures with at-risk youth”,
National Mental Health Working Group. 2005, National safety
Journal of At-Risk Issues, vol. 13, no. 1.
priorities in mental health: A national plan for reducing harm,
Health Priorities and Suicide Prevention Branch, Department of Sailas, E., & Wahlbeck, K. 2005. “Restraint and seclusion in psychiatric
Health and Ageing, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. inpatient wards”, Current Opinion in Psychiatry, vol. 18, no. 5,
pp. 555-559.
Nishimura, C.F. 2011, “Eliminating the use of restraint and seclusion
against students with disabilities”, Texas Journal on Civil Liberties Sanders, K. 2009, “The effects of an action plan, staff training,
& Civil Rights, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 189-231. management support and monitoring on restraint use and
costs of work-related injuries”, Journal of Applied Research in
O’Hagan, M., Divis, M. & Long, J. 2008, “Best practice in the reduction
Intellectual Disabilities, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 216-220.
and elimination of seclusion and restraint: seclusion time for
change”, Auckland: Te Pou Te Whakaaro Nui: the National Scanlan, J. 2010, “Interventions to reduce the use of seclusion and
Centre of Mental Health Research, Information and Workforce restraint in inpatient psychiatric settings: What we know so far a
Development. review of the literature”, International Journal of Social Psychiatry,
vol. 56, pp. 412-423.
Paterson, B. 2009, “Control and restraint: changing thinking, practice
and policy”, Mental Health Practice, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 16-20. Schreiner, G.M., Crafton, C.G. & Sevin, J.A. 2004, “Decreasing the use
of mechanical restraints and locked seclusion”, Administration and
Paterson, B., Mcintosh, I., Wilkinson, D., Mccomish, S. & Smith, I. 2013,
Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, vol.
“Corrupted cultures in mental health inpatient settings. Is restraint
31, no. 6, pp. 449-463.
reduction the answer?” Journal of Psychiatric & Mental Health
Nursing, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 228-235. Sclafani, M.J., Humphrey, I., Frederick, J., Repko, S., Ko, H.S., Wallen,
M.C. & DiGiacomo, A. 2008, “Reducing patient restraints: A pilot
Pollard, R., Yanasak, E.V., Rogers, S.A. & Tapp, A. 2007,
approach using clinical case review”, Perspectives in Psychiatric
“Organizational and unit factors contributing to reduction in the
Care, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 32-39.
use of seclusion and restraint procedures on an acute psychiatric
inpatient unit”, Psychiatric Quarterly, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 73-81. Shelton, D., Kesten, K., Zhang, W. & Trestman, R. 2011, “Impact of a
Dialectic Behavior Therapy—Corrections Modified (DBT-CM) Upon
Prescott, D.L., Madden, L.M., Dennis, M., Tisher, P. & Wingate, C.
Behaviorally Challenged Incarcerated Male Adolescents”, Journal
2007, “Reducing mechanical restraints in acute Psychiatric care
of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, vol. 24, no. 2, pp.
settings using rapid response teams”, Journal of Behavioral Health
105-113.
Services & Research, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 96-105.
Singh, N.N., Lancioni, G.E., Winton, A.S., Singh, A.N., Adkins, A.D.
Price, O. & Baker, J. 2012, “Key components of de-escalation
& Singh, J. 2009, “Mindful staff can reduce the use of physical
techniques: A thematic synthesis”, International Journal of Mental
restraints when providing care to individuals with intellectual
Health Nursing, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 310-319.
disabilities”, Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual
Prinsen, E.J. & van Delden, J.J. 2009, “Can we justify eliminating Disabilities, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 194-202.
coercive measures in psychiatry?” Journal of Medical Ethics, vol.
Sivak, K. 2012, “Implementation of comfort rooms to reduce
35, no. 1, pp. 69-73.
seclusion, restraint use, and acting-out behaviors”, Journal of
Putkonen, A., Kuivalainen, S., Louheranta, O., Repo-Tiihonen, E., Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health Services, vol. 50, no. 2, pp.
Ryynänen, O., Kautiainen, H. & Tiihonen, J. 2013, “Cluster- 24-34.
randomized controlled trial of reducing seclusion and restraint in
Smalls, Y. 2004, Utility of the implementation of programmatic
secured care of men with schizophrenia”, Psychiatric Services, vol.
systems to reduce and eliminate restraint use for the treatment of
64, no. 9, pp. 850-855.
problem behaviors with individuals with mental retardation.
Quinn, A. & Shera, W. 2009, “Evidence-based practice in group
work with incarcerated youth”, International Journal of Law and
Psychiatry, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 288-293.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 15

Smith, G.M., Davis, R.H., Bixler, E.O., Lin, H., Altenor, A., Altenor, Sullivan, M. & Ghroum, P. 2013, “Incident reporting to improve clinical
R.J., Hardentstine, B.D. & Kopchick, G.A. 2005, “Special section practice in a medium-secure setting”, Mental Health Practice, vol.
on seclusion and restraint: Pennsylvania State Hospital System’s 16, no. 7, pp. 16-20.
seclusion and restraint reduction program”, Psychiatric Services,
Sutton, D., Wilson, M., Van Kessel, K. & Vanderpyl, J. 2013,
vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 1115-1122.
“Optimizing arousal to manage aggression: A pilot study of
Steckley, L. 2010, “Containment and holding environments: sensory modulation”, International Journal of Mental Health
Understanding and reducing physical restraint in residential child Nursing, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 500-511.
care”, Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 120-
Swanson, J.W., Swartz, M.S., Elbogen, E.B., Van Dorn, R.A., Wagner,
128.
H.R., Moser, L.A., Wilder, C. & Gilbert, A.R. 2008, “Psychiatric
Steinert, T., Eisele, F., Goeser, U., Tschoeke, S., Uhlmann, C. & Schmid, advance directives and reduction of coercive crisis interventions”,
P. 2008, “Successful interventions on an organisational level to Journal of Mental Health, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 255-267.
reduce violence and coercive interventions in in-patients with
Taylor, T.L., Killaspy, H., Wright, C., Turton, P., White, S., Kallert, T.W.,
adjustment disorders and personality disorders”, Clinical Practice
Schuster, M., Cervilla, J.A., Brangier, P. & Raboch, J. 2009, “A
and Epidemiology in Mental Health, vol. 4, pp. 27.
systematic review of the international published literature relating
Steinert, T., Lepping, P., Bernhardsgrütter, R., Conca, A., Hatling, T., to quality of institutional care for people with longer term mental
Janssen, W., Keski-Valkama, A., Mayoral, F. & Whittington, R. 2010, health problems”, BMC Psychiatry, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 55.
“Incidence of seclusion and restraint in psychiatric hospitals:
Tekkas, K. & Bilgin, H. 2010, “[Professional containment methods
A literature review and survey of international trends”, Social
used in psychiatry wards: justifications for their utilization, types,
Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 889-
international practices, and perceptions]”, Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi =
897.
Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 235-242.
Stewart, D., Van der Merwe, M., Bowers, L., Simpson, A. & Jones, J.
van de Sande, R., Nijman, H.L.I., Noorthoorn, E.O., Wierdsma,
2010, “A review of interventions to reduce mechanical restraint
A.I., Hellendoorn, E., van der Staak, C. & Mulder, C.L. 2011,
and seclusion among adult psychiatric inpatients”, Issues in
“Aggression and seclusion on acute psychiatric wards: Effect of
Mental Health Nursing, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 413-424.
short-term risk assessment”, The British Journal of Psychiatry, vol.
Stubbs, B., Leadbetter, D., Paterson, B., Yorston, G., Knight, C. & Davis, 199, no. 6, pp. 473-478.
S. 2009, “Physical intervention: A review of the literature on its
Van Doeselaar, M., Sleegers, P. & Hutschemaekers, G. 2008,
use, staff and patient views, and the impact of training”, Journal of
“Professionals’ attitudes toward reducing restraint: The case of
Psychiatric & Mental Health Nursing, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 99-105.
seclusion in The Netherlands”, Psychiatric Quarterly, vol. 79, no. 2,
Sturmey, P., Lott, J., Laud, R. & Matson, J. 2005, “Correlates of restraint pp. 97-109.
use in an institutional population: A replication”, Journal of
Wale, J.B., Belkin, G.S. & Moon, R. 2011, “Reducing the use of
Intellectual Disability Research, vol. 49, no. 7, pp. 501-506.
seclusion and restraint in psychiatric emergency and adult
Sturmey, P. 2009, “It is time to reduce and safely eliminate restrictive inpatient services- improving patient-centered care”, The
behavioural practices”, Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Permanente Journal, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 57-62.
Disabilities, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 105-110.
Williams, D.E. 2010, “Reducing and eliminating restraint of people
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. 2005, with developmental disabilities and severe behavior disorders:
Roadmap to seclusion and restraint free mental health services. An overview of recent research”, Research in Developmental
HHS Pub. No. (SMA) 05-4055. Retrieved from store.samhsa.gov/ Disabilities, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 1142-1148.
product/SMA06-4055
Williams, D.E. & Grossett, D.L. 2011, “Reduction of restraint of
Sullivan, A.M., Bezmen, J., Barron, C.T., Rivera, J., Curley-Casey, L. & people with intellectual disabilities: An organizational behavior
Marino, D. 2005, “Reducing restraints: Alternatives to restraints management (OBM) approach”, Research in Developmental
on an inpatient psychiatric service—Utilizing safe and effective Disabilities, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 2336-2339.
methods to evaluate and treat the violent patient”, Psychiatric
Witte, L. 2008, “Reducing the use of seclusion and restraint”,
Quarterly, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 51-65.
Behavioral Healthcare, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 54-57.

REDUCING RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES CHECKLIST 16