As part of their care, adults with intellectual disabilities are often subject to restrictive interventions including restraint.
Method:
A review examining the prevalence of restraint use with people with intellectual disabilities and the characteristics associated with its use.
Results:
The seven papers identified used quantitative methodologies and had cross-sectional designs. Prevalence rates of restraint ranged from 11% to 78%, multiple forms of restraint were common. Most studies focused on characteristics within the person with an intellectual disability, three considered external factors. Challenging behaviour was the most consistent characteristic associated with the use of restraint, but how this was defined varied.
Conclusions:
The review highlights a need for more consistent means of defining and measuring restraint and its associated characteristics. Future research into this area may also want to focus on the context of restraint such as whether it is the least restrictive option used.
AcelloBHegnerB (2016) Nursing Assistant: A Nursing Process Approach, 11th ed. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
2.
AliABlickwedelJHassiotisA (2014) Interventions for challenging behaviour in intellectual disability. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment20(3): 184–192. DOI: 10.1192/apt.bp.113.011577.
3.
BonnerGLoweTRawcliffeD, et al. (2002) Trauma for all: a pilot study of the subjective experience of physical restraint for mental health inpatients and staff in the UK. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing9(4): 465–473. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2850.2002.00504.x.
EmersonERobertsonJGregoryN, et al. (2000) Treatment and management of challenging behaviours in residential settings. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities13(4): 197–215. DOI: 10.1046/j.1468-3148.2000.00036.x.
6.
FishRCulshawE (2005) The last resort? Staff and client perspectives on physical intervention. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities9(2): 93–107. DOI: 10.1177/1744629505049726.
7.
FowkesFGRFultonPM (1991) Critical appraisal of published research: introductory guidelines. British Medical Journal302(6785): 1136–1140. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1669795/ (accessed 6 January 2016).
8.
GaskinCJMcVillyKRMcGillivrayJA (2013) Initiatives to reduce the use of seclusion and restraints on people with developmental disabilities: a systematic review and quantitative synthesis. Research in Developmental Disabilities34(11): 3946–3961. DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2013.08.010.
9.
HarrisJ (1996) Physical restraint procedures for managing challenging behaviours presented by mentally retarded adults and children. Research in Developmental Disabilities17(2): 99–134. DOI: 10.1016/0891-4222(95)00036-4.
10.
HawkinsSAllenDJenkinsR (2005) The use of physical interventions with people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour the experiences of service users and staff members. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities18: 19–34. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3148.2004.00207.x.
11.
Health and Social Care Information Centre (2015) Learning Disability Census Report. Available at: http://digital.nhs.uk/catalogue/PUB16760. (accessed 4 January 2018).
12.
KarlssonSBuchtGErikssonS (2001) Factors relating to the use of physical restraints in geriatric care settings. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society49(12): 1722–1728. DOI: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2001.49286.x.
13.
LuiselliJK (2009) Physical restraint of people with intellectual disability: a review of implementation reduction and elimination procedures. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities22: 126. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468- 3148.2008.00479.x.
14.
LundströmMOAntonssonHKarlssonS, et al. (2011) Use of physical restraints with people with intellectual disabilities living in Sweden’s group homes. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities8(1): 36–41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-1130.2011.00285.x.
15.
MatsonJLBoisjoliJA (2009) Restraint procedures and challenging behaviours in intellectual disability: an analysis of causative factors. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities22(2): 111–117. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3148.2008.00477.x.
16.
McGillPMurphyGKelly-PikeA (2009) Frequency of use and characteristics of people with intellectual disabilities subject to physical interventions. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities22(2): 152–158. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3148.2008.00483.x.
17.
Merineau-CoteJMorinD (2013) Correlates of restraint and seclusion for adults with intellectual disabilities in community services. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research57(2): 182–190. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2012.01601.x.
National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (2015) Challenging behaviour and learning disabilities: prevention and interventions for people with learning disabilities whose behaviour challenges (NG11). Available at: http://nice.org.uk/guidance/ng11 (accessed 17 January 2016).
20.
SandersonSTattIDHigginsJP (2007) Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. International Journal of Epidemiology36(3): 666–676. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dym018.
21.
ScheirsJGMBlokJBTolhoekMA, et al. (2012) Client factors as predictors of restraint and seclusion in people with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability37(2): 112–120. DOI: 10.3109/13668250.2012.682357.
22.
StroutTD (2010) Perspectives on the experience of being physically restrained: an integrative review of the qualitative literature. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing19(6): 416–427. DOI: 10.1111/j.1447- 0349.2010.00694.x.
23.
SturmeyP (1999) Correlates of restraint use in an institutional population. Research in Developmental Disabilities20(5): 339–346. DOI: 10.1016/S0891- 4222(99)00015-3.
24.
SturmeyP (2009) Restraint, seclusion and prn medication in English services for people with learning disabilities administered by the National Health Service: an analysis of the 2007 national audit survey. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities22(2): 140–144. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3148.2008.00481.
25.
TilliDMSpreatS (2009) Restraint safety in a residential setting for persons with intellectual disabilities. Behavioral Interventions24: 127–136. DOI: 10.1002/bin.28.
VanVoorhisCRWMorganBL (2007) Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology3: 43–50. DOI: 10.20982/tqmp.03.2.p043.
28.
Von ElmEAltmanDGPocockSJ, et al. (2007) Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet370(9596): 1453–1457. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39335.541782.AD.
29.
WebberSMcVillyRChanJ (2011) Restrictive interventions for people with a disability exhibiting challenging behaviours: analysis of a population database. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities24: 495–507. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3148.2011.00635.x.
30.
WynnR (2007) Psychiatric inpatients’ experiences with restraint. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology15(1): 124–144. DOI: 10.1080/14789940410001655187.
