Citation

Stubbs B, Leadbetter D, Paterson B, Yorston G, Knight C, Davis S. J. Psychiatr. Ment. Health Nurs. 2009; 16(1): 99-105.

Affiliation

St Andrews Healthcare, Northampton, UK. bstubbs@standrew.co.uk

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1365-2850.2008.01335.x

PMID

19192092

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.

Language: en