Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40346442›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of mental health nursing2025

Outcomes of Restrictive Practice Review Meetings in an Acute Mental Health Unit: A Retrospective Before-and-After Study.

Esario Iv Daguman, Alison Taylor, Matthew Flowers, Richard Lakeman, Marie Hutchinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of mental health nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Esario Iv DagumanFaculty of Health, Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3319-7077
Alison TaylorIntegrated Mental Health, Alcohol and Other Drugs, Coffs Harbour Base Hospital, Coffs Harbour, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8544-1878
Matthew FlowersIntegrated Mental Health, Alcohol and Other Drugs, Coffs Harbour Base Hospital, Coffs Harbour, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1418-0864
Richard LakemanFaculty of Health, Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4304-5431
Marie HutchinsonFaculty of Health, Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0025-2681

Funding

NSW Office for Health and Medical ResearchSouthern Cross University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A structured process of reviewing incidents of seclusion and physical restraint supports nurses in managing the emotional and relational impact of restrictive practices. However, these reviews are not a routine feature of everyday acute care provision, and have historically been influenced by practices that reflect a managerial or disciplinary focus. A retrospective before-and-after study was conducted in an adult acute mental health inpatient unit in regional New South Wales, Australia. The goal was to determine the impact of strengths-based restrictive practice review meetings from January 2019 to March 2020, with an equivalent timeframe before its implementation (October 2017-December 2018). The events of seclusion, physical restraint, and Code Blacks (emergency codes requiring security personnel in response to personal safety threats) were compared before and after the implementation of review meetings, with covariate balancing applied to enhance comparability. The reduction in the rate of seclusion was statistically significant post-implementation (incidence rate ratios [IRR] = 0.37, 95% CI [0.24, 0.57], p < 0.001). At the same time, physical restraint showed a statistically insignificant reduction (IRR = 0.76, 95% CI [0.53, 1.09], p = 0.14). Code Black incidents remained stable (IRR = 1.02, 95% CI [0.70, 1.49], p = 0.91). These mixed results indicate that strengths-based reviews play a role in reducing coercion, although additional strategies may be needed to achieve significant reductions in restrictive practice outcomes. Intervention development requires broader service-level changes, with open and robust evaluations that enhance accountability and capture key influencing factors.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersPatient IsolationPsychiatric Department, HospitalRestraint, PhysicalAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew South WalesPsychiatric NursingRetrospective Studiescoercioncognitive reflectionmental health servicesphysical restraintpsychiatric nursing

Identifiers

PMID40346442
PMCPMC12064479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.