↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

An integrative review exploring the physical and psychological harm inherent in using restraint in mental health inpatient settings

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#7 of 878)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
113 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
An integrative review exploring the physical and psychological harm inherent in using restraint in mental health inpatient settings
Published in
International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, January 2018
DOI 10.1111/inm.12432
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pauline Cusack, Frank Patrick Cusack, Sue McAndrew, Mick McKeown, Joy Duxbury

Abstract

In Western society, policy and legislation seeks to minimize restrictive interventions, including physical restraint; yet research suggests the use of such practices continues to raise concerns. Whilst international agreement has sought to define physical restraint, diversity in the way in which countries use restraint remains disparate. Research to date has reported on statistics regarding restraint, how and why it is used, and staff and service user perspectives about its use. However, there is limited evidence directly exploring the physical and psychological harm restraint may cause to people being cared for within mental health inpatient settings. This study reports on an integrative review of the literature exploring available evidence regarding the physical and psychological impact of restraint. The review included both experimental and nonexperimental research papers, using Cooper's (1998) five-stage approach to synthesize the findings. Eight themes emerged: Trauma/retraumatization; Distress; Fear; Feeling ignored; Control; Power; Calm; and Dehumanizing conditions. In conclusion, whilst further research is required regarding the physical and psychological implications of physical restraint in mental health settings, mental health nurses are in a prime position to use their skills and knowledge to address the issues identified to eradicate the use of restraint and better meet the needs of those experiencing mental illness.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 113 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 21%
Unspecified 8 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 15%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Other 14 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 36%
Psychology 11 23%
Unspecified 9 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 89. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2019.
All research outputs
#183,828
of 13,533,353 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Mental Health Nursing
#7
of 878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,524
of 349,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Mental Health Nursing
#4
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,533,353 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 349,450 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.