Seclusion use with children and adolescents: an Australian experience

Objective: To summarize the current state of knowledge on the use of seclusion and restraint with children and adolescents and to report the findings of an exploratory study to identify factors that place a child or adolescent at increased risk of seclusion during their admission. Method: Literature searches were undertaken on MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases. Articles were identified that focused specifically on seclusion and restraint use with children and adolescents or contained material significant to this population. The study reports findings from a retrospective review of patient charts, seclusion registers and staffing from an Australian acute inpatient facility. Results: The data available in regard to seclusion use in this population is limited and flawed. Further research is needed on the use and outcomes of seclusion and restraint and on alternative measures in the containment of dangerousness. Both the literature and this study find that patients with certain factors are at increased risk of being secluded during an inpatient stay. These factors include being male, diagnoses of disruptive behaviour disorder and a previous history of physical abuse. Staffing factors did not show a relationship to the use of seclusion. Conclusions: There are patient factors that predict increased risk of seclusion; these factors and their interrelationships require further elucidation. Further research is also needed on the outcomes, both positive and negative, of seclusion use and of alternatives to seclusion.

Interaction between disinhibition and restraint: Implications for body weight and eating disturbance

An increase in obesity is usually accompanied by an increase in eating disturbances. Susceptibility to these states may arise from different combinations of underlying traits: Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) Restraint and Disinhibition. Two studies were conducted to examine the interaction between these traits; one on-line study (n=351) and one laboratory-based study (n=120). Participants completed a battery of questionnaires and provided self-report measures of body weight and physical activity. A combination of high Disinhibition and high Restraint was associated with a problematic eating behaviour profile (EAT-26), and a higher rate of smoking and alcohol consumption. A combination of high Disinhibition and low Restraint was associated with a higher susceptibility to weight gain and a higher sedentary behaviour. These data show that different combinations of Disinhibition and Restraint are associated with distinct weight and behaviour outcomes.

Psycho-markers of weight loss. The roles of TFEQ Disinhibition and Restraint in exercise-induced weight management

Eating behaviour traits, namely Disinhibition and Restraint, have the potential to exert an effect on food intake and energy balance. The effectiveness of exercise as a method of weight management could be influenced by these traits. Fifty eight overweight and obese participants completed 12-weeks of supervised exercise. Each participant was prescribed supervised exercise based on an expenditure of 500 kcal/session, 5 d/week for 12-weeks. Following 12-weeks of exercise there was a significant reduction in mean body weight (-3.26 ± 3.63 kg), fat mass (FM: -3.26 ± 2.64 kg), BMI (-1.16 ± 1.17 kg/m2)and waist circumference (WC: -5.0 ± 3.23 cm). Regression analyses revealed a higher baseline Disinhibition score was associated with a greater reduction in BMI and WC, while Internal Disinhibition was associated with a larger decrease in weight, %FM and WC. Neither baseline Restraint or Hunger were associated with any of the anthropometric markers at baseline or after 12-weeks. Furthermore, after 12-weeks of exercise, a decrease in Disinhibition and increase in Restraint were associated with a greater reduction in WC, whereas only Restraint was associated with a decrease in weight. Post-hoc analysis of the sub-factors revealed a decrease in External Disinhibition and increase in Flexible Restraint were associated with weight loss. However, an increase in Rigid Restraint was associated with a reduction in %FM and WC. These findings suggest that exercise-induced weight loss is more marked in individuals with a high level of Disinhibition. These data demonstrate the important roles that Disinhibition and Restraint play in the relationship between exercise and energy balance.

Effects of changes to child car restraint legislation in Australia on seating position and restraint use

Road trauma is a leading cause of child injury worldwide and in highly motorised countries, injury as a passenger represents a major proportion of all child road deaths and hospitalisations. Australia is no exception, particularly since motorised transport to school is at high levels in most Australian states. Recently the legislation governing the type of car restraints required for children aged under 7 years has changed in most Australian states aligning requirements better with accepted best practice. However, it is unclear what effect these changes have had on children’s seating positions or the types of restraints used. A mixed methods evaluation of the impact of the new legislation on compliance was conducted at three times: baseline (Time 1); after announcement that changes were going to be implemented but before enforcement began (Time 2); and after enforcement commenced (Time 3). Measures of compliance were obtained using two methods: road-side observations of vehicles with child passengers; and parental self-report (intercept interviews conducted at Time 2 and Time 3 only). Results from the observations suggested an overall positive effect. Proportions of children occupying front seats decreased overall and use of dedicated child seas increased to almost 40% of the observed children by Time 3. However, almost a quarter of the children observed were still occupying the front seat. These results were very different from those of the interview study where almost no children were reported as usually travelling in the front seat, and the reported use of dedicated restraints with children was almost 90%, more than twice that in the observations.

Understanding the impact of legislative changes on child car seating and restraint practices in regional Queensland

Road crashes contribute to a significant amount of child mortality and morbidity in Australia. In fact, passenger injuries contribute to the majority of child crash road trauma. A number of factors contribute to child injury and death in motor vehicles, including inappropriate seating position, inappropriate choice of restraint, and incorrect installation and use of child restraints. Prior to March 2010, child restraint legislation in Queensland only required children twelve months and younger to be seated in a properly adjusted and fastened child restraint. This legislation left older infants and young children potentially suboptimally protected. From March 2010, new legislation specified seating position and type of child restraint required, depending on the age of the child. This research was underpinned by the Health Belief Model (HBM), which explores health related behaviour, behaviour change, environmental factors influencing behaviour change (including legislative changes) and is flexible enough to be used in relation to parents' health practices for their children, rather than parent health directly. This thesis investigates the extent to which the changes to child restraint legislation have led parents in regional areas of Queensland to use appropriate restraint practices for their children and determines the extent to which the constructs of the HBM, parental perceptions, barriers and environmental factors contribute to the appropriateness of child seating and restraint use. Study One included three sets of observations taken in two regional cities of Queensland prior to the legislative amendment, during an educative period of six months, and after the enactment of the legislation. Each child's seating position and restraint type were recorded. Results showed that the proportion of children observed occupying the front seat decreased by 15.6 per cent with the announcement the legislation. There was no decrease in front seat use at the enactment of the legislation. The proportion of children observed using dedicated child restraints increased by 8.8 per cent with the announcement of the legislation when there was one child in the vehicle. Further, there was a 10.1 per cent increase in the proportion of children observed using a seat belt that fit with the announcement when there was one child in the vehicle and with the enactment of the legislation regardless of the number of children in the vehicle (21.8 per cent for one child, 39.7 per cent for two children and 40.2 per cent for three or more children). Study Two comprised initial intercept interviews, later followed up by telephone, with parents with children aged eight years and younger at the announcement and telephone interviews at the enactment of the legislation in one regional city in Queensland. Parents reported their child restraint practices, and opinions, knowledge and understanding of the requirements of the new legislation. Parent responses were analysed in terms of the constructs in the HBM. When asked which seating position their child 'usually' used, parents reported child front seat use was nil (0.0 per cent) and did not change with the enactment of the legislative amendment. However, when parents were asked whether they allowed children to use the front seat at some point within the six months prior to the interview, reported child front seat use was 7 (5.4 per cent) children at T2 and 10 (9.6 per cent) at T3. Reported use of age-appropriate child restraints did not increase with the enactment of the legislation (p = 0.77, ns). Parents reported restraint practices were classed as either appropriate or inappropriate. Parents who reported appropriate restraint practices were those whose children were sitting in optimal restraints and seating positions for their age according to the requirements of the legislation. Parents who reported inappropriate restraint practices were those who had one or more children who were suboptimally restrained or seated for their age according to the requirements of the legislation. Neither parents' perceptions about their susceptibility of being in a crash nor the likelihood of severity of child injury if involved in a crash yielded significant differences in the appropriateness of reported parent restraint practices over time with the enactment of the legislation. A trend in the data suggested parents perceived a benefit to using appropriate restraint practices was to avoid fines and demerit points. Over 75 per cent of parents who agreed that child restraints provide better protection for children than an adult seat belt reported appropriately seating and restraining their children (2 (1) = 8.093, p<.05). The self-efficacy measure regarding parents' confidence in installing a child restraint showed a significant association with appropriate parental restraint practices (2 (1) = 7.036, p<.05). Results suggested that some parents may have misinterpreted the announcement of the legislative amendment as the announcement of the enforcement of the legislation instead. Some parents who correctly reported details of the legislation did not report appropriate child restraint practices. This finding shows that parents' knowledge of the legislative amendment does not necessarily have an impact on their behaviour to appropriately seat and restrain children. The results of these studies have important implications for road safety and the prevention of road-related injury and death to children in Queensland. Firstly, parents reported feeling unsure of how to install restraints, which suggests that there may be children travelling in restraints that have not been installed correctly, putting them at risk. Interventions to alert and encourage parents to seek advice when unsure about the correct installation of child restraints could be considered. Secondly, some parents in this study although they were using the most appropriate restraint for their children, reported using a type that was not the most appropriate restraint for the child's age according to the legislation. This suggests that intervention may be effective in helping parents make a more accurate choice of the most appropriate type of restraint to use with children, especially as the child ages and child restraint requirements change. Further research could be conducted to ascertain the most effective methods of informing and motivating parents to use the most appropriate restraints and seating positions for their children, as these results show a concerning disparity between reported restraint practices and those that were observed.

The doctrine of necessity and the detention and restraint of people with intellectual impairment: Is there any justification?

In Australia, the legal basis for the detention and restraint of people with intellectual impairment is ad hoc and unclear. There is no comprehensive legal framework that authorises and regulates the detention of, for example, older people with dementia in locked wards or in residential aged care, people with disability in residential services or people with acquired brain injury in hospital and rehabilitation services. This paper focuses on whether the common law doctrine of necessity (or its statutory equivalents) should have a role in permitting the detention and restraint of people with disabilities. Traditionally, the defence of necessity has been recognised as an excuse, where the defendant, faced by a situation of imminent peril, is excused from the criminal or civil liability because of the extraordinary circumstances they find themselves in. In the United Kingdom, however, in In re F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation) and R v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust, ex parte L, the House of Lords broadened the defence so that it operated as a justification for treatment, detention and restraint outside of the emergency context. This paper outlines the distinction between necessity as an excuse and as a defence, and identifies a number of concerns with the latter formulation: problems of democracy, integrity, obedience, objectivity and safeguards. Australian courts are urged to reject the United Kingdom approach and retain an excuse-based defence, as the risks of permitting the essentially utilitarian model of necessity as a justification are too great.

Activism and Restraint within the UK Supreme Court

This article provides evidence for the extent to which the UK Supreme Court as a body - and Supreme Court Justices as individuals - have displayed an activist or restrained attitude to their decision-making role. Taking October 2009 as the starting point (when the UKSC came into existence) the article surveys the degree to which the Court and individual Justices have (1) departed from precedents, (2) interpreted legislation in unanticipated ways, (3) rejected the government's position on matters of social, economic or foreign policy, and (4) developed the common law. The article concludes that, while the Supreme Court as a whole remains as conservative as the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords which preceded it (with the possible exception of its approach to immigration law), there are notable differences between the attitudes of individual Justices, one or two of whom appear to be straining at the leash.

The duration of capture and restraint during anesthesia and euthanasia influences glucocorticoid levels in male golden hamsters

Deep litter has been shown to decrease stereotypic wire-gnawing in male golden hamsters, suggesting that increased litter depth may be associated with decreased chronic stress levels. To determine the relationship between litter depth and stress levels in hamsters, the authors measured serum levels of corticosterone, cortisol, and ACTH in male golden hamsters kept in cages with three different depths of litter. The duration of handling the hamsters significantly increased the concentrations of corticosterone, cortisol, and the ratio of cortisol/corticosterone. It took longer to catch hamsters housed in cages with deep litter and the ACTH levels were higher in these hamsters. The positive effect of the enrichment (deep litter) was diminished by methodological problems during handling/anesthesia.

A treatise on the law of executions in civil cases and of proceedings in aid and restraint thereof.

Mode of access: Internet.

Evaluation of occupant protection devices and restraint systems. Test report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Conglomerate mergers--their effects on small business and local communities [microform] : hearings before the Subcommittee on Antitrust and Restraint of Trade Activities Affecting Small Business of the Committee on Small Business, House of Representatives, Ninety-sixth Congress, second session, Washington, D.C., January 31 and February 1, 7, 8, 12, 27, and 28, 1980.

CIS Microfiche Accession Numbers: CIS 81 H721-1

Evaluation of occupant protection devices and restraint systems : /

Mode of access: Internet.