Background

Despite agreement that restrictive intervention (RI) should only be used as a last resort and for as long as required, little is known about long-term RI among individuals with a disability. This study examines long-term RI use.

Method

From the Restrictive Intervention Data System dataset from Victoria, Australia, a cohort of 1,414 people reported to be restrained or secluded between July 2008 and June 2010 were identified. The primary outcome was restraint during the follow-up period (July 2013–June 2015). Measures of the secondary outcome, reasons for restraint cessation, were assessed via a self-report survey completed by 54 service providers.

Results

At follow up, 74% of the cohort was still subject to RI. Antipsychotic medication use, a diagnosis of autism, and communication difficulties were associated with the use of restrictive interventions at follow up.

Conclusions

Long-term RI is prevalent, but can be minimised by positive behaviour support.

中文翻译：

---

长期使用限制性干预措施的相关因素

背景

尽管同意限制性干预（RI）仅应在万不得已的情况下使用，并且只能在需要时使用，但对于残障人士的长期RI知之甚少。这项研究检查了长期使用RI。

方法

从澳大利亚维多利亚州的“限制性干预数据系统”数据集中，确定了据报道在2008年7月至2010年6月之间受到克制或隔离的1,414人队列。在随访期间（2013年7月至2015年6月），主要结局受到限制。通过54个服务提供商完成的自我报告调查，评估了次要结果（即戒律停止的原因）的量度。

结果

随访时，仍有74％的人群接受了RI。抗精神病药物的使用，自闭症的诊断和沟通困难与随访时使用限制性干预措施有关。

结论

长期RI很普遍，但是可以通过积极的行为支持将其减至最少。