Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Restraints and seclusion are a common practice in many human service settings despite the increasing evidence questioning their efficacy and appropriateness. There are many detrimental effects on people subject to these practices, such as falls, injury, psychological trauma and even death. In addition to the impact on people being served, there is also a range of negative effects on organisations and the workforce. This article outlines and discusses the costs to organisations in implementing restraints and seclusion, and the economic cost-benefits to be gained in working towards the safe elimination of restraints and seclusion. A brief outline of ethical alternatives to restraints and seclusion is explored. The emerging research evidence suggests that it is possible to achieve the safe elimination of restraints and seclusion in a human service organisation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!