Forensic and general psychiatric patients' view of seclusion: a comparison study

Keski-Valkama, Alice; Koivisto, Anna‐Maija; Eronen, Markku; Kaltiala-Heino, Riittakerttu

doi:10.1080/14789940903456569

Cited by 47 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Negative feelings raised by seclusion and restraint include anger, fear, loneliness, anxiety, hostility, sadness, misery, rejection, betrayal, guilt and embarrassment (Meehan et al 2000;Holmes et al 2004;Wynn 2005;El-Badri and Mellsop 2008;Kontio et al 2012). Patients have reported they felt powerless and that they were being subjected to punishment rather than to treatment (Gallop et al 1999;Meehan et al 2004;El-Badri and Mellsop 2008;Keski-Valkama et al 2010a;Kontio et al 2012).…”

Section: Patients' Perception Of Seclusion and Restraintmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Patients have reported problems during seclusion ranging from maintaining their basic needs such as hygiene to a lack of meaningful activities (El-Badri and Mellsop 2008;Keski-Valkama et al 2010a;Kontio et al 2012). Patients also said they would have needed more communication and human presence during seclusion or restraint (Meehan et al 2000;Chien et al 2005;Mayers et al 2010;Kontio et al 2012).…”

Section: Patients' Perception Of Seclusion and Restraintmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Even though there are studies on patients' experiences of seclusion dating back to the 1970s and 1980s (Wadeson and Carpenter 1976;Binder and McCoy 1983;Soliday 1985;Hamill et al 1989;Mann et al 1993), interest in this theme has increased since about 2000 (Meehan et al 2000;Hoekstra et al 2004;Holmes et al 2004;Meehan et al 2004;Sørgaard 2004;Wynn 2005;Chien et al 2005;Stolker et al 2006;Steinert et al 2007;El-Badri and Mellsop 2008;Keski-Valkama et al 2010a;Kontio et al 2012).…”

Section: Patients' Perception Of Seclusion and Restraintmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…To get some privacy in these situations, patients may wish to be placed in a seclusion room (Stolker et al 2006). A patient-friendly environment on the ward has been reported to be helpful in managing aggression (Keski-Valkama et al 2010a;Kontio et al 2012). The environment on the wards needs regular improvements to ensure privacy and peacefulness; private rooms as well as therapeutic furnishing should be guaranteed.…”

Section: Patients' Perception Of Seclusion and Restraintmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Patient Experience of Coercive Measures

Soininen

Kontio

Joffe

et al. 2016

The Use of Coercive Measures in Forensic Psychiatric Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coercive situations are complicated and stressful for both the one being forced as well as the one forcing the other. Patients' experiences of coercion have been studied since the end of the 1970s, and interest in this theme has increased since about 2000. It seems that involuntary treatment as a general concept is more accepted than individual, specific coercive measures, such as forced medication, seclusion or restraint, which patients usually deem unnecessary. Patients' views on seclusion and restraint have been mostly but not always negative. For instance, patients have expressed seclusion-or restraint-related feelings of safety and security, protection, trust, helpfulness and a decrease of stimulation. Moreover, perceptions vary according to, for example, patients' age and gender and their adaptation to the illness and treatment system. The importance of patients' perspective and service user involvement in the development of services has been officially recognised. Indeed, taking patients' experience into proper consideration is a matter of the services' quality. In this chapter, we also discuss these future challenges.

show abstract

Section: Patients' Perception Of Seclusion and Restraintmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Patients' Perception Of Seclusion and Restraintmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Patients' Perception Of Seclusion and Restraintmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Patients' Perception Of Seclusion and Restraintmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Patient Experience of Coercive Measures

Soininen

Kontio

Joffe

et al. 2016

The Use of Coercive Measures in Forensic Psychiatric Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, Finnish legislation and psychiatric units still prioritise the need for treatment over personal autonomy, particularly on the basis of risk of self-harm ( Tuohimaki et al, 2003). Importantly, in a Finnish study focusing on seclusion, psychiatric patients themselves viewed compulsory measures as necessary in a psychiatric hospital setting (Keski-Valkama et al, 2010). Similarly, at the risk of paternalism, Finnish legislation emphasises the responsibility of the medical profession in ultimately deciding on treatment, albeit within clearly defined legal constraints.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental health law in Finland

Seppänen¹,

Eronen

2012

Int. psychiatry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Mistakes in interpersonal perceptions: Social cognition in aggressive forensic psychiatry patients

Battaglia

Gicas

Mамак

et al. 2022

Criminal Behav Ment Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: While there is an established link between untreated psychosis and aggression, an enhanced understanding of the role of social cognition is still needed. Aims: To examine social cognitive functioning among patients in a specialist forensic mental health service who had been deemed not criminally responsible for acts of violence due to a psychotic disorder. It was hypothesised, first, that such patients would show reduced social cognitive functioning compared with healthy, nonviolent comparison participants and, second, that those who continued to be aggressive while inpatients would demonstrate significant reductions compared to the now nonaggressive group. Methods: The study samples were of 10 recently aggressive and 15 not-recently aggressive patients and 20 healthy, nonviolent comparison participants. Each completed the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ), the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test-Revised (RMET) and the Interpersonal Perception Task-15 (IPT-15). Results: There was no significance between group differences on the RMET and TEQ. The patient group as a whole, however, showed significant interpersonal misperceptions, with specific misperceptions on IPT-15 deception and kinship subscales, while at the same time lacking selfawareness of their errors. Misperceptions on the IPT-15

show abstract

Forensic and general psychiatric patients' view of seclusion: a comparison study

Cited by 47 publications

References 22 publications

Patient Experience of Coercive Measures

Patient Experience of Coercive Measures

Mental health law in Finland

Mistakes in interpersonal perceptions: Social cognition in aggressive forensic psychiatry patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About