Exploring the complexity of acute inpatient mental health nurses experience of chemical restraint interventions: Implications on policy, practice and education

Nurses' clinical decision‐making in the use of rapid tranquillization in adult mental health inpatient settings: An integrative review

“…Nurses generally considered rapid tranquillization as something to be avoided if possible, although attitudes among nurses towards its use were divergent. For instance, they could use it as the first or only resort in some situations if alternatives provided only a shortterm solution (Danda, 2022;Haglund et al, 2003;Muir-Cochrane et al, 2018;Tucker et al, 2020) or if nurses considered rapid tranquillization the least intrusive measure or as neither wrong, punitive nor problematic to use (Danda, 2020(Danda, , 2022Gustafsson & Salzmann-Erikson, 2016;Lind et al, 2004). Furthermore, the more frequently rapid tranquillization was used, the more its use became accepted among nurses (Keser Özcan et al, 2015).…”

“…Therefore, rapid tranquillization was considered only at the moment when other responses to the behaviour had been tried without success, followed by a decision that the behaviour had escalated to a level that required medication, if necessary administered by force (Danda, 2020;Lützén, 1987;Vuckovich & Artinian, 2005). This decision was made by nurses, often in collaboration with other professionals (Danda, 2020(Danda, , 2022Lützén, 1987;Vuckovich & Artinian, 2005). Additionally, it was occasionally reported that nurses perceived that hospitalized people had co-responsibility for such decisions about medication needs as it was their behaviour that led to the decisions (Danda, 2020(Danda, , 2022Gustafsson & Salzmann-Erikson, 2016).…”

“…This decision was made by nurses, often in collaboration with other professionals (Danda, 2020(Danda, , 2022Lützén, 1987;Vuckovich & Artinian, 2005). Additionally, it was occasionally reported that nurses perceived that hospitalized people had co-responsibility for such decisions about medication needs as it was their behaviour that led to the decisions (Danda, 2020(Danda, , 2022Gustafsson & Salzmann-Erikson, 2016).…”

“…Studies were published between 1987 and 2022 in European and Western countries and included findings based on 397 nurses (225 female and 121 male). Two studies were based on the same sample and are counted only once (Danda, 2020(Danda, , 2022. Three studies reported no or incomplete gender information (missing data: n = 51) (Lützén, 1987;Muir-Cochrane et al, 2018;Vuckovich & Artinian, 2005).…”

“…Nurses reported that people who had a definite need for medication better preserved their dignity by taking medication voluntarily, and therefore, nurses made an effort to assist them understand their situation and the necessity for medicine (Danda, 2020;Lützén, 1987;Vuckovich & Artinian, 2005). Furthermore, nurses could feel guilt and frustration if people received rapid tranquillization without prior proper negotiation of alternatives (Danda, 2022;Vuckovich & Artinian, 2005). In the studies, it was reported that those involved on both sides of these negotiations could affect the negotiations in both directions, where the probability of rapid tranquillization use was either increased or reduced, for instance, due to the mental health status of the person who was hospitalized (Gustafsson & Salzmann-Erikson, 2016;Vuckovich & Artinian, 2005) or nurses' experiences, and fear and commitment in the situation (Danda, 2020(Danda, , 2022Gustafsson & Salzmann-Erikson, 2016;Vuckovich & Artinian, 2005).…”