Managing the risks of physical intervention: developing a more inclusive approach.

Accessible summary • It is imperative that the use of physical interventions be reduced. However, when they are used the safety of recipients must be maximized. • A focus on the ‘prone restraint position’ has led to a narrowed understanding of the risks associated with the application of force during restraints. • The ‘transitional stabilizing position’ offers a platform upon which to consider the broader risks arising during restraints. • Training staff to manage such situational risks, using a variation on the existing ABC safety check could be instrumental in reducing the likelihood of adverse outcomes associated with restraints. Since psychiatry evolved as a professional discipline, mental healthcare professionals have had to, as a last resort, physically intervene to manage physically aggressive patients. In the United Kingdom, physical intervention techniques migrated from the prison service in the mid 1980s where there was extensive use of two particularly controversial practices; ‘pain compliance’ and the ‘prone restraint position’. This paper examines how the classification of the ‘prone restraint position’ has led to a narrowed focus on one technique and a resultant misunderstanding around the wider risks associated with the applying force and managing restraints. The paper goes on to propose the ‘transitional stabilizing position’ (TSP) as an alternative concept and puts forward a dynamic risk assessment model. It explores how a shift in staff training away from developing pure competence in the performance of tightly specified techniques to managing the patient in TSPs could conceivably reduce the relatively low risk of death or serious injury associated with the application of restraint techniques to an even lower level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]