98%
921
2 minutes
20
Aim: Investigate patient perspectives on barriers and enablers to the use and effectiveness of de-escalation techniques for aggression in mental health settings.
Background: De-escalation techniques are the recommended first-line intervention for the management of aggression in mental health settings internationally, yet use of higher risk restrictive practices persists. This indicates de-escalation techniques are not used at optimum frequency and/or there are important factors limiting their use and effect.
Design: Descriptive qualitative research using semi-structured interviews and Framework Analysis.
Methods: Inpatient interviews (N = 26) exploring staff, patient and environmental factors influencing the use and effectiveness of staff de-escalation were conducted mid-2014. Three service user researchers led analysis.
Results: Data were synthesized in three deductive themes relating to staff, patient and environmental influences on the use and effectiveness of de-escalation techniques. The dominant view was that restrictive practices, rather than de-escalation techniques, are used in response to escalating patient behaviour. Under-use of de-escalation techniques was attributed to: lack of staff reflection on culture and practice and a need to retain control/dominance over patients. Ward rules, patient factors and a lack of staff respect for patients diluted their effectiveness. Participants identified a systematic process of de-escalation, rule subversion, reduced social distance and staff authenticity as enablers of effective de-escalation.
Conclusion: This study investigated patient perspectives on staff, patient and environmental influences on the use and effectiveness of de-escalation techniques. Our framework of barriers and enablers provides indicators of organizational/behaviour change targets for interventions seeking to reduce violence and restrictive practices through enhanced de-escalation techniques.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jan.13488 | DOI Listing |
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
September 2025
Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne,
Purpose: This study examined head and neck cancer treatment outcome priorities in patients with human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer (HPVOPC) before and 12 months (12m) after (chemo)radiotherapy ([C]RT).
Methods And Materials: Eligible patients were diagnosed with HPVOPC suitable for curative-intent primary [C]RT. Study data included responses to a modified version of the Chicago Priorities Scale (CPS-modified) and select items from the MDASI Head and Neck Cancer Module (MDASI-HN).
Cancer Treat Rev
August 2025
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, University of Fukui Hospital, Japan.
Aim: To critically review the emerging evidence from two randomised trials-KEYNOTE-689 and NIVOPOSTOP-on perioperative immune checkpoint inhibition in resectable, locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, and to elucidate how these positive results may redefine the current and future treatment paradigms.
Methods: We conducted a narrative review comparing the design, patient populations, treatment protocols, and outcomes of KEYNOTE-689 and NIVOPOSTOP. Data sources included ClinicalTrials.
Nurs Outlook
September 2025
The Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Background: State legislation such as the Pennsylvania Healthcare Worker Violence Prevention Act would mandate hospital reporting of workplace violence (WPV) incidents and require committees that advance safety measures.
Purpose: Since it is unknown what interventions should be prioritized by hospital committees if such legislation were passed, we described strategies that hinder or facilitate the prevention and de-escalation of WPV.
Methods: Qualitative, descriptive study using individual and focus group interviews with emergency department (ED) nurses and physicians (n = 23) at a level I trauma center ED in Pennsylvania between August 2023 and February 2024.
J Neurol
September 2025
Department of Neurology, University Medical Center of Rostock, Neuroimmunological Section, Rostock, Germany.
Background: High efficacy therapies (HET) play a crucial role in multiple sclerosis (MS) management. HET discontinuation/de-escalation is a critical decision, especially in different age groups, due to potential changes in relapse rates. We aimed at evaluating the impact of HET discontinuation on annualized relapse rates (ARRs) in people with MS (pwMS) aged ≥ 50 or < 50 years.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOral Oncol
September 2025
Head and Neck Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Background: Despite overexpression of EGFR in head/neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), cetuximab monotherapy has limited benefit. Lenvatinib is a multi-targeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against FGFRs1-4, involved in resistance to EGFR inhibition. We evaluated lenvatinib in combination with cetuximab in recurrent/metastatic (R/M) HNSCC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF