Cargando…

Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review

PURPOSE: To identify and summarise extant knowledge about patient ethnicity and the use of various types of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings. METHODS: A scoping review methodological framework recommended by the JBI was used. A systematic search was conducted in APA Ps...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pedersen, Martin Locht, Gildberg, Frederik, Baker, John, Damsgaard, Janne Brammer, Tingleff, Ellen Boldrup
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9713127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36454269
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-022-02387-8
_version_ 1784841946039058432
author Pedersen, Martin Locht
Gildberg, Frederik
Baker, John
Damsgaard, Janne Brammer
Tingleff, Ellen Boldrup
author_facet Pedersen, Martin Locht
Gildberg, Frederik
Baker, John
Damsgaard, Janne Brammer
Tingleff, Ellen Boldrup
author_sort Pedersen, Martin Locht
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To identify and summarise extant knowledge about patient ethnicity and the use of various types of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings. METHODS: A scoping review methodological framework recommended by the JBI was used. A systematic search was conducted in APA PsycINFO, CINAHL with Full Text, Embase, PubMed and Scopus. Additionally, grey literature searches were conducted in Google, OpenGrey and selected websites, and the reference lists of included studies were explored. RESULTS: Altogether, 38 studies were included: 34 were primary studies; 4, reviews. The geographical settings were as follows: Europe (n = 26), Western Pacific (n = 8), Americas (n = 3) and South-East Asia (n = 1). In primary studies, ethnicity was reported according to migrant/national status (n = 16), mixed categories (n = 12), indigenous vs. non-indigenous (n = 5), region of origin (n = 1), sub-categories of indigenous people (n = 1) and religion (n = 1). In reviews, ethnicity was not comparable. The categories of restrictive practices included seclusion, which was widely reported across the studies (n = 20), multiple restrictive practices studied concurrently (n = 17), mechanical restraint (n = 8), rapid tranquillisation (n = 7) and manual restraint (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Ethnic disparities in restrictive practice use in adult mental health inpatient settings has received some scholarly attention. Evidence suggests that certain ethnic minorities were more likely to experience restrictive practices than other groups. However, extant research was characterised by a lack of consensus and continuity. Furthermore, widely different definitions of ethnicity and restrictive practices were used, which hampers researchers’ and clinicians’ understanding of the issue. Further research in this field may improve mental health practice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00127-022-02387-8.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9713127
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97131272022-12-01 Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review Pedersen, Martin Locht Gildberg, Frederik Baker, John Damsgaard, Janne Brammer Tingleff, Ellen Boldrup Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Review PURPOSE: To identify and summarise extant knowledge about patient ethnicity and the use of various types of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings. METHODS: A scoping review methodological framework recommended by the JBI was used. A systematic search was conducted in APA PsycINFO, CINAHL with Full Text, Embase, PubMed and Scopus. Additionally, grey literature searches were conducted in Google, OpenGrey and selected websites, and the reference lists of included studies were explored. RESULTS: Altogether, 38 studies were included: 34 were primary studies; 4, reviews. The geographical settings were as follows: Europe (n = 26), Western Pacific (n = 8), Americas (n = 3) and South-East Asia (n = 1). In primary studies, ethnicity was reported according to migrant/national status (n = 16), mixed categories (n = 12), indigenous vs. non-indigenous (n = 5), region of origin (n = 1), sub-categories of indigenous people (n = 1) and religion (n = 1). In reviews, ethnicity was not comparable. The categories of restrictive practices included seclusion, which was widely reported across the studies (n = 20), multiple restrictive practices studied concurrently (n = 17), mechanical restraint (n = 8), rapid tranquillisation (n = 7) and manual restraint (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Ethnic disparities in restrictive practice use in adult mental health inpatient settings has received some scholarly attention. Evidence suggests that certain ethnic minorities were more likely to experience restrictive practices than other groups. However, extant research was characterised by a lack of consensus and continuity. Furthermore, widely different definitions of ethnicity and restrictive practices were used, which hampers researchers’ and clinicians’ understanding of the issue. Further research in this field may improve mental health practice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00127-022-02387-8. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-12-01 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9713127/ /pubmed/36454269 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-022-02387-8 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2022, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Review
Pedersen, Martin Locht
Gildberg, Frederik
Baker, John
Damsgaard, Janne Brammer
Tingleff, Ellen Boldrup
Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review
title Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review
title_full Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review
title_fullStr Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review
title_short Ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review
title_sort ethnic disparities in the use of restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: a scoping review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9713127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36454269
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-022-02387-8
work_keys_str_mv AT pedersenmartinlocht ethnicdisparitiesintheuseofrestrictivepracticesinadultmentalhealthinpatientsettingsascopingreview
AT gildbergfrederik ethnicdisparitiesintheuseofrestrictivepracticesinadultmentalhealthinpatientsettingsascopingreview
AT bakerjohn ethnicdisparitiesintheuseofrestrictivepracticesinadultmentalhealthinpatientsettingsascopingreview
AT damsgaardjannebrammer ethnicdisparitiesintheuseofrestrictivepracticesinadultmentalhealthinpatientsettingsascopingreview
AT tingleffellenboldrup ethnicdisparitiesintheuseofrestrictivepracticesinadultmentalhealthinpatientsettingsascopingreview