Following an initial springboard study, a further more extensive piece of research was conducted to identify and evaluate approaches used to manage patient aggression and violence on three acute mental health wards. Data were gathered using an incident form, a questionnaire and interviews. The views of patients (n = 80), nurses (n = 72) and medical staff (n = 10) were explored. Findings revealed a clear distinction between the way staff and patients view both the problem and the response. Patients' view present staff approaches as 'controlling' and believe that environmental and poor communication factors underpin aggressive behaviour. Staff, conversely, attribute aggressive behaviour to internal patient and external factors, which may explain the reason for approaches used. A strong correlation was found between type of patient aggression and response (r = 0.36, P < 0.000) and a high percentage of incidents reported were of an aggressive, as opposed to violent, nature. For example 70% of incidents involved verbal abuse or threat. Despite this, 47% (n = 103) of approaches incorporated the use of medication, restraint or seclusion. These are commonly referred to as traditional methods. Patients clearly view this controlling style as a part of the problem and an emphasis upon control and symptom reduction may be inappropriate given the type of aggression encountered. Key issues were further analysed using an internal, external and situational model, each of which endeavour to explain reasons for patient aggression from different perspectives. It is this emphasis upon sole perspectives that may both contribute to and result in the use of a limited number of management approaches adopted in practice. The integration of all three models to examine the complex nature of patient aggression and violence from a variety of perspectives may be the way forward. As a result, approaches to deal with this problem could be more meaningful and subsequently effective.

Aim.  This paper reports a study of staff and patient perspectives on the causes of patient aggression and the way it is managed. Background.  The incidence of aggression in healthcare is reportedly on the increase, and concerns about the management of this problem are growing. Method.  A convenience sample of 80 patients and 82 nurses from three inpatient mental healthcare wards were surveyed using The Management of Aggression and Violence Attitude Scale. A further five patients and five nurses from the same sample participated in a number of follow‐up interviews. Results.  Patients perceived environmental conditions and poor communication to be a significant precursor of aggressive behaviour. Nurses, in comparison, viewed the patients’ mental illnesses to be the main reason for aggression, although the negative impact of the inpatient environment was recognized. From interview responses, it was evident that both sets of respondents were dissatisfied with a restrictive and under‐resourced provision that leads to interpersonal tensions. Conclusion.  There are differences between the views of staff and patients about reasons for aggression and its management. Future approaches therefore need to be developed that address these opposing views. For example, training in the use of fundamental therapeutic communication skills was advocated by patients, whilst the need for greater attention to organizational deficits was advocated by nurses. A move away from reliance on the use of medication was also felt to be necessary. Evaluation of local needs and practices must be an integral part of this process.

Research to further understand the experience and actualization of 'last resort' in the use of restraint and to provide strategies to prevent restraint use in mental health settings are needed.

Accessible summary A key role of nursing staff in high secure hospitals is responding to patients' aggressive behaviour. Attitudes of staff in high secure hospitals may influence how they respond to patient aggression. Patients will have their own attitudes towards aggression and how it should be managed. In our study, the views of staff and patients regarding aggression were overall similar, with both groups espousing controlling means of aggression management (medication, restraint, seclusion) in addition to interpersonal strategies. Abstract Responding to aggressive behaviour is a key activity for nurses and other care staff in high secure hospitals. The attitudes and beliefs of staff regarding patient aggression will influence the management strategies they adopt. Patients will also hold attitudes regarding the causes of and best ways to respond to aggressive behaviour. This study measured the attitudes towards aggression of staff (n= 109) and patients (n= 27) in a high secure hospital in the UK using the Management of Aggression and Violence Attitude Scale (MAVAS). There was considerable concordance of views, staff and patients disagreeing on only two items on the MAVAS. Aggression was felt to have a range of causes, embracing factors internal to the person, factors in the external environment and situational or interactional factors. Interpersonal means of managing aggression were supported, but both staff and patients also advocated the use of controlling management strategies such as medication, seclusion and restraint. The implications of these findings for aggression management in high secure settings are discussed in the light of best practice guidelines that promote interpersonal approaches over controlling strategies.

Restraint and seclusion (R/S) have been used in many countries and across service sectors for centuries.With the recent and increasing recognition of the harm associated with these procedures, eff orts have been made to reduce and prevent R/S.

In Western society, policy and legislation seeks to minimize restrictive interventions, including physical restraint; yet research suggests the use of such practices continues to raise concerns. Whilst international agreement has sought to define physical restraint, diversity in the way in which countries use restraint remains disparate. Research to date has reported on statistics regarding restraint, how and why it is used, and staff and service user perspectives about its use. However, there is limited evidence directly exploring the physical and psychological harm restraint may cause to people being cared for within mental health inpatient settings. This study reports on an integrative review of the literature exploring available evidence regarding the physical and psychological impact of restraint. The review included both experimental and nonexperimental research papers, using Cooper's (1998) five-stage approach to synthesize the findings. Eight themes emerged: Trauma/retraumatization; Distress; Fear; Feeling ignored; Control; Power; Calm; and Dehumanizing conditions. In conclusion, whilst further research is required regarding the physical and psychological implications of physical restraint in mental health settings, mental health nurses are in a prime position to use their skills and knowledge to address the issues identified to eradicate the use of restraint and better meet the needs of those experiencing mental illness.

The administration of medication is an important therapeutic intervention. However, concerns have been raised about the management of this procedure in the acute area. Therefore, a survey was conducted with registered nurses (n = 24) and patients (n = 57) from three acute admission wards in an inner city hospital in the north west of England. Semistructured interviews were conducted immediately following medication administration and then analyzed using thematic analysis. Nurses' views were categorized into three themes: ward environment, communication, and sharing of information. Nurses reported that policies and procedures provided clear guidance, but that the task remained stressful and the role of other professionals affected the integrity of the procedure. Patients' views were categorized into four themes: effects and side-effects of medication, the process of administration, therapeutic relationships, and the sharing of information. Most patients were accepting of the administration of their medication, but called for improvements in information sharing and side-effect management. Information sharing is pivotal in establishing therapeutic relationships, but the time of administration might not be the most appropriate occasion for this.

Perhaps due to the complexities of the problem of aggression and violence, and to ethical issues relating to the mental health areas where much of the work is focused, it is the perspective of staff working in those areas that is most commonly sought in research studies. In contrast, tools to examine the patient's view are rare. In this paper Joy Duxbury describes the piloting and development of a new tool, which aimed to survey the views of both patients and staff about the broader approaches used to manage patient aggression. This became the 'Management of Aggression and Violence Attitude Scale' (MAVAS), and the testing of this tool is the focus of this paper.