Psychiatric nursing managers' attitudes towards containment methods in psychiatric inpatient care

Abstract

Aims This research was conducted to examine psychiatric nursing managers' attitudes towards containment methods. Background Nursing management is regarded as a key issue in the reduction of coercion and containment. However, there has been little research on managers' attitudes towards containment methods. Methods This descriptive, cross‐sectional study utilized a survey design. Finnish inpatient psychiatric nursing managers (n = 90) completed the Attitudes to Containment Measures Questionnaire (ACMQ). The results were described with statistics, and the associations between attitudes and background variables were analysed using parametric tests. Results Psychiatric nursing managers had the most negative attitude towards net bed and mechanical restraint, and the most positive attitudes towards as necessary medication and intermittent observation. A few associations were discovered between attitudes and background variables such as gender and number of employees. Conclusions In general, Finnish psychiatric nursing managers' attitudes towards containment methods seem to be quite negative, but more research is needed. Implications for Nursing Management This study provides fresh and unique data on the attitudes of psychiatric nursing managers towards containment methods. Managers' attitudes are important because of their ability to encourage investment in coercion reduction by nursing staff.

A Bayesian network model to identify the associations between the use of seclusion in psychiatric care and nursing managers' attitudes towards containment methods

“…It is possible that managers encourage the staff to use other measures instead of intermittent observation, if it is not considered as a dignified, even though effective, method. In previous studies, nursing managers' attitudes towards intermittent observation seem to have been more positive than attitudes towards seclusion (Laukkanen, Kuosmanen, Louheranta, et al., 2020), and nursing staff were found to consider intermittent observation as more acceptable than the use of seclusion (Bowers et al., 2007).…”

Locked versus open ward environments and restrictive measures in acute psychiatry in Greece: Nursing students' attitudes and experiences

“…54,55 Otherwise, one would not be able to explain how the initial abhorrence for mechanical restraint-a natural human reaction-turned into an acceptance of practice through the professional socialization process. Similarly, Özcan et al 30 indicate that using or witnessing the application of a particular containment measure in an acute care ward leads to higher approval for this measure while Bowers et al 31,33 stress that mental health professionals have more negative attitudes towards types of containment that are not used in their countries and more positive attitudes towards the containment measures that are frequently used in their countries. Furthermore, the greater levels of declared preparedness to use mechanical restraint on the part of male students may be similar to other studies' results 20,31 but it is of concern since it may indicate-apart from anxiety-tendencies towards satisfying gendered expectations strengthened by the ward culture.…”

“…29 Nonetheless, nurses' attitudes towards containment measures have become more negative in time while more mental health nurses report feelings of frustration and guilt regarding their use acknowledging PWMHPs' feelings towards coercion. 30 Finally, there is evidence of international variation in attitudes towards containment among mental health nurses 30,31 as well as nursing students 32,33 related to cultural and legislation differences.…”

Der KEZ – Kölner Fragebogen zu Einstellungen zu Zwangsmaßnahmen

“…Der Fragebogen ACMQ aus England (Attitudes to Containment Measures Questionnaire) [16], der auch in deutscher Übersetzung vorliegt [17], erfasst die Einstellungen und die Erfahrung des Personals mit den einzelnen Zwangsmaßnahmen wie z. B. Isolierung, Fixierung und Zwangsmedikation, ohne jedoch die ganzheitliche Haltung zu Zwang abzugreifen [18]. Der Fragebogen SACS aus Norwegen (The Staff Attitude to Coercion Scale) [19] erfasst die grundsätzliche Haltung zur Anwendung von Zwang in der Behandlung psychisch Kranker, er berücksichtigt aber weder die emotionalen Komponenten noch die Interaktion mit Teammitgliedern und Vorgesetzten, und auch nicht die Besonderheiten durch bestimmte patientenseitige Eigenschaften und die Bedeutung der gesellschaftlichrechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen.…”