Search

Background: Rapid tranquillisation is used when control of agitation, aggression or excitement is required. Throughout the UK there is no consensus over the choice of drugs to be used as first line treatment. The NICE guideline on the management of violent behaviour involving psychiatric inpatients conducted a systematic examination of the literature relating to the effectiveness and safety of rapid tranquillisation (NICE, 2005). This paper presents the key findings from that review and key guideline recommendations generated, and discusses the implications for practice of more recent research and information. Aims: To examine the evidence on the efficacy and safety of medications used for rapid tranquillisation in inpatient psychiatric settings. Method: Systematic review of current guidelines and phase III randomised, controlled trials of medication used for rapid tranquillisation. Formal consensus methods were used to generate clinically relevant recommendations to support safe and effective prescribing of rapid tranquillisation in the development of a NICE guideline. Findings: There is a lack of high quality clinical trial evidence in the UK and therefore a 'gold standard' medication regime for rapid tranquillisation has not been established. Rapid tranquillisation and clinical practice: The NICE guideline produced 35 recommendations on rapid tranquillisation practice for the UK, with the primary aim of calming the service user to enable the use of psychosocial techniques. Conclusions and implications for clinical practice: Further UK specific research is urgently needed that provides the clinician with a hierarchy of options for the clinical practice of rapid tranquillisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of this review was to assess whether restraint and seclusion are safe and effective interventions for the short-term management of disturbed/violent behaviour. Staff and service user perspectives on the use of these interventions were also considered. The review was undertaken as part of the development process for a national guideline on the short-term management of disturbed/violent behaviour in adult psychiatric inpatient settings and emergency departments in the United Kingdom., Method: An exhaustive literature search was undertaken. Systematic reviews, before and after studies, as well as qualitative studies were included. Searches were run from 1985 to 2002., Findings: Thirty-six eligible studies were identified. However, none were randomised controlled trials. Most of the included studies had many limitations, such as small sample sizes, confounders not adequately accounted for, potential selection bias, poorly reported results, and lack of clarity as to whether mechanical restraints were used. This review must therefore be viewed as a mapping exercise, which illustrates the range and quality of studies that have been undertaken in this area to date., Conclusions and Implications for Practice: Insufficient evidence is available to determine whether seclusion and restraint are safe and/or effective interventions for the short-term management of disturbed/violent behaviour in adult psychiatric inpatient settings. These interventions should therefore be used with caution and only as a last resort once other methods of calming a situation and/or service user have failed.

The luminol chemiluminescence reaction has been investigated for the determination of cobalt in a planar glass micro reactor. Reagents were mobilised within an etched glass chip with 200 microm wide channels using either electrically driven flow with voltages below 200 V cm(-1) or negative pressure pumping. Surfactants were used to assist mobilisation of the luminol for electrically driven flow and this also increased the chemiluminescence intensity in that system. A calibration over seven orders of magnitude was achieved for cobalt(II) nitrate with the negative pressure pumping system, and the limit of detection at the 95% confidence level was 3 x 10(-11) mol l(-1). The limit of detection for the electrokinetic flow was 4 x 10(-11) mol l(-1) and the linear range was between 10(-10) to 10(-6) mol l(-1). The advantages and disadvantages of both mobilisation methods are discussed for this reaction.