Physical intervention: a review of the literature on its use, staff and patient views, and the impact of training |
| |
Authors: | B. STUBBS bs,c mcsp srp,D. LEADBETTER ms,c ba dipsw cqsw certswed certmtd,B. PATERSON ba m,ed phd rmn rnld,G. YORSTON mbbs ms,c mrcpsych,C. KNIGHT c,lin psy d cpsychol csci afbpss & S. DAVIS ms,c rgn pgcea dipman |
| |
Affiliation: | Lead Physiotherapist,;Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist,;Consultant Neuropsychologist, St Andrews Healthcare, Northampton,;Training Consultant, Director, CALM Training Services, Clackmannanshire,;Lecturer Nursing Studies, Department of Nursing Studies, University of Stirling, Stirling, and;Principal Lecturer, School of Healthcare, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK |
| |
Abstract: | As a principal control measure, physical intervention is intended to be a skilled manual, or hands-on, method of physical restraint implemented by trained individuals, with the intention of controlling the aggressive patient, to restore safety in the clinical environment. Physical intervention is however a contentious practice. There have been reports in the literature of negative psychological views from staff and patients on the procedure. Although formal structured training was introduced in response to concerns around patient safety during restraint, concerns remain that PI is sometimes construed as a stand-alone violence prevention initiative. Its potential for misuse, and overuse, in corrupted cultures of care has emerged as a social policy issue. The following paper critically explores the literature on training in physical intervention in the United Kingdom. |
| |
Keywords: | control and restraint management of aggression physical intervention staff and patient views training |
|
|