Seclusion & Restraint Reduction

In New Zealand and around the world there is a growing need to reduce restraint and seclusion in mental health facilities and organisations. A study conducted by Mayers et al. (2010) found that when restraint or seclusion was used service users felt that their "human rights had been infringed during acute episodes of illness" (p. 60). Sensory modulation is a safe, more client-centred and effective way to help regain a sense of calm during high states of arousal and/or distress instead of using restraint and seclusion.

While I was on placement there were service users who were put into seclusion. I didn't see how this was effective nor did it help in their recovery process. I observed that when people where in seclusion, more staff where needed to monitor them which resulted in the rest of the service users not being able to engage in activities that they normally would have done, for example, playing sport, going for walks and art group due to the reduced staff numbers. So it not only affected the individual in seclusion but also the rest of the service users.

It is im my opinion that using sensory modulation as an alternative to restraint and seclusion interventions allows service users to be treated more humanely and helps to stop situations from escalating. I believe that restraint and seclusion should only be used in cases of emergency. Stewart et al. (2010) notes that when service users realise restraint is going to take place they can become more anxious, scared and angry which can sometimes escalate the situation.

References:

Mayers, P., Keet, N., Winkler, G., & Flisher, A. (2010). Mental health service users' perceptions and experiences of sedation, seclusion and restraint. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 56(1), 60-73. 

Stewart, D., M, Bowers, L., Simpson, A., & Jones, J. (2010). A review of interventions to reduce mechanical restraint and seclusion among adult psychiatric inpatients. Issues in Mental Health Nursing , 31(6), 413-424.