Search

Physical restraint is a restrictive practice used in schools across the UK and there have been recent concerns around the appropriateness and frequency of using this intervention with pupils. Current data suggest that pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN), a vulnerable and diverse group, are experiencing the majority of physical restraint used in educational settings. Physical restraint can lead to negative emotional and physical consequences in pupils who experience it and it is, therefore, important to explore alternative strategies to reduce or eliminate its use in educational settings. A systematic literature search found 15 studies (date range 1999-2019) that explored the effectiveness of school-wide or individual approaches in reducing the frequency and/or duration of physical restraint. Most studies saw a significant decrease in physical restraint, and this study will discuss the key elements of the successful approaches, as well as consider the facilitators and barriers to implementation.

Physical restraint is a restrictive practice used in schools, but there are no up-to-date statistics concerning the frequency of its usage in England and there are concerns as to whether it is being used appropriately and effectively. Pupils with special educational needs are more likely to experience physical restraint in school, but opportunities for them to share their views through research are limited. Through semi-structured interviews, four primary-aged pupils from a specialist social, emotional and mental health (SEMH) educational setting shared their experiences of physical restraint, its impact on their relationships with staff members, and alternative strategies. Overall, participants had negative experiences of physical restraint, highlighting that it should be used for safety, but not for minor incidents. All participants identified useful alternative strategies that helped them to feel calmer. The ability to separate negative emotions associated with physical restraint and supporting staff members varied between participants. The findings are discussed in relation to implications for educational psychology practice and future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]