Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42080234›Full record

ArticleJournal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing2026

Mental Health Nurses' Perceived Appropriateness of Coercive Measures and Security Technologies in Psychiatric Settings: A National Cross-Sectional Study.

Giuliano Anastasi, Roberto Latina, Yari Longobucco, Alessandro Stievano, Stefano Bambi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Giuliano AnastasiDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, University of Enna Kore, Enna, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0984-1987
Roberto LatinaDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Childcare, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7829-3654
Yari LongobuccoDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2703-9349
Alessandro StievanoDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3508-2352
Stefano BambiDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0360-4470

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPsychiatric settings are high-risk environments for violence. Coercive measures (CMs) and security technologies (STs) can be used to ensure safety. However, limited evidence exists on how Italian mental health nurses (MHNs) perceive the appropriateness of such practices and the influencing factors. This study aimed to fill this gap.

designCross-sectional study.

methodsAn online survey collected sociodemographic data and validated measures of depression, anxiety, stress, stigma toward mental illness, and humanization of care. The perceived appropriateness of various CMs and STs was rated on a 5-point Likert scale using a validated item set. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, bivariate tests, and multilevel mixed-effects linear regression.

resultsA total of 707 MHNs participated in the study. CMs were considered moderately appropriate (mean = 3.56 ± 0.92), with pharmacological restraint and locked-door policies rated as more appropriate than physical restraint. STs were evaluated better (mean = 3.74 ± 0.95), with alarms and closed-circuit television judged more appropriate than body-worn cameras and metal detectors. CMs were considered less appropriate by non-believers (p = 0.009), head nurses (p < 0.001), and those in non-acute settings (p = 0.004), and more appropriate by those in Central Italy (p = 0.036), on daytime shifts (p = 0.042), and with higher stigma (p = 0.012). STs were considered less appropriate by males (p = 0.004), head nurses (p = 0.040), and more experienced MHNs (p < 0.001), and more appropriate by those in Southern Italy (p < 0.001) and in non-acute settings (p < 0.001).

conclusionMHNs consider CMs and STs moderately appropriate. Perceptions are influenced by both individual and contextual factors. Targeted training, anti-stigma education, and inclusive policies are needed to ensure ethical and evidence-based safety practices in psychiatric care. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Targeted education and training in mental health nursing, both continuing and post-graduate, are essential to support cultural change among MHNs and ensure the appropriate use of CMs and STs. Integrating anti-stigma initiatives and involving MHNs in policy development can strengthen clinical decision-making and foster safer, more ethical, and person-centred psychiatric care.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCoercionPsychiatric NursingSecurity MeasuresAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedRestraint, PhysicalSurveys and Questionnairesattitudescoercionmental healthnursespsychiatrysafetytechnologies

Identifiers

PMID42080234
PMCPMC13137403

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.