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
Background/aim: Although sensory approaches are recommended to relieve distress and agitation and reduce the use of seclusion and restraint, many Australian psychiatric units have struggled to sustain their practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the barriers and enablers influencing the use of different sensory approaches across one health region in Australia and to obtain recommendations for strategies to improve their use.
Method: This cross-sectional survey was informed by the Theoretical Domain Framework. Likert scale questions considered barriers and enablers to the use of non-weighted sensory interventions, weighted modalities, sensory rooms, and sensory assessments/plans. Open-ended questions explored participant concerns and recommendations to improve the use of sensory approaches.
Results: Participants (n = 211) were from nursing, allied health, medical, and peer support staff across inpatient psychiatric units. Factors most frequently identified as enablers for using sensory approaches were beliefs of positive benefits to consumers (e.g. decreasing distress and agitation); belief it was within the staff's role; and knowledge of the approaches. Limited time was the most common identified barrier. Factors statistically associated with more frequent use were knowledge, skills, confidence, availability, and easy access to sensory tools/equipment. Only 30% of participants were concerned about potential risks of sensory approaches, with this risk mitigated through adequate supervision and thorough risk assessment. Recommendations to improve practice included improved access to, and maintenance of, equipment, more training, and increased staffing.
Conclusion: This study revealed how barriers and enablers vary for different sensory approaches and how these factors impact their frequency of use in psychiatric units. It provides insights into staff recommendations to improve the use of sensory approaches in one health region in Australia. This knowledge will lead to the development of implementation strategies to address identified barriers and improve the use of sensory approaches in psychiatric units.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12889 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!