ArticlePLOS mental health2026
Patients' experiences and perceptions of physical restraint in psychiatric care: A descriptive qualitative study at Muhimbili National Hospital.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical restraint in psychiatric care remains controversial due to ethical concerns and the risk for physical and psychological harm. Despite its continued use to manage aggression and maintain safety, evidence on patients' experiences in low-resource settings, including Tanzania, is limited. This study explored patients' experiences and perceptions of physical restraint during psychiatric hospitalization at Muhimbili National Hospital. A qualitative descriptive design was used involving 14 purposively selected adult patients who had experienced physical restraint. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, and seven themes were identified. Participants described restraint as a complex intervention with both perceived benefits and significant harms. While some acknowledged its role in preventing violence, maintaining ward safety, and supporting treatment during acute agitation, many reported negative experiences, including pain and injury, loss of dignity, humiliation, lack of explanation, ignored requests for assistance, and feelings of coercion or punishment. Limited involvement in decision making and the absence of post-restraint debriefing further undermined trust in healthcare providers. Although some participants accepted restraint as necessary in certain situations, many recommended alternatives, such as verbal de-escalation, attentive communication, pharmacological calming, and close observation. When restraint was unavoidable, patients emphasized the need for humane implementation, including minimal force, short duration, continuous monitoring, and respectful interaction. Overall, physical restraint was experienced as both protective and potentially harmful. The findings highlight the need for context-specific patient-centered approaches that prioritize communication, alternatives to restraint, post-restraint engagement, and staff training to strengthen ethical and rights-based mental health care in Tanzania.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.