Physical Restraint and Near Death of a Psychiatric Patient

Physical restraint is used as a last resort emergency measure to calm and safeguard agitated and/or aggressive psychiatric patients. This can sometimes cause injuries, and rare fatalities have occurred. One mechanism of injury and death while in physical restraint is that of severe asphyxiation. We present the case of a hospitalized man in his mid‐30s, suffering from schizophrenia. The patient was obese. He became aggressive and had to be manually restrained with a “takedown.” After having been put in the prone position on the floor with a significant weight load on his body, he lost respiration and consciousness. Subsequently, he was given CPR. He regained consciousness and respiration, while the cyanosis receded in 1–2 min. Psychiatrists and pathologists should be aware that physically restraining a patient in the prone position with a significant weight load on the torso can, in rare cases, lead to asphyxiation.     

A discourse–design approach to multimodality: the visual communication of neoliberal management discourse

This paper takes a discourse–design approach to communication, providing a framework as to how this should be done. Design here is how individuals and institutions realize their interests in the world. We show how it is fruitful to link design more closely to the way discourse has been used in critical studies which draws attention to the motivated use of design, for thinking about design in terms of socio-political context. Due to their affordances, semiotic modes such as photography, graphics, layout, colour, numbers and writing will be deployed and co-articulated. The aim, using a discourse–design approach, is to show how we can best identify the very different affordances of such modes and how they rely on the principled design of a discourse. We illustrate this using examples from management documents at a university which draw on these different affordances in different ways to communicate the same discourse. Through this analysis we see how a neoliberal discourse based on a general design principle of coordination enters everyday practices and become very difficult to challenge.     

Caffeine fatalities--four case reports

Four cases of fatal intoxications with caffeine are described. Caffeine is widely available in beverages and in different OTC-products, in many of them in combinations with other drugs like ephedrine. Caffeine is not as harmless as one might believe. An overdose of caffeine alone, intentional or not, might be deadly. It seems to be warranted to include caffeine in the drug-screening of forensic autopsy cases. It is not motivated from a medical point of view to sell pure caffeine over the counter.     

Attitudes among stakeholders towards compulsory mental health care in Norway

Objectives

The Norwegian Mental Health Care Act allows use of coercion under certain conditions. Even though the current practice has been criticized, little empirical data exist about the attitudes towards compulsory mental health care.

Method

This study used Q-methodology to identify prototypical attitudes and to test possible differences of attitudes between groups of stakeholders towards the use of coercion in mental health care. Sixty-two respondents who represented six groups with different roles in mental health care participated: former patients, relatives of psychiatric patients, members of supervisory commissions, psychiatrists, other physicians, and lawyers.The participants were asked to assess the degree to which they agreed on 30 statements concerning use of coercion for the mentally ill.

Results

Three factors that in a meaningful way express different attitudes towards the question were found. The most widely shared attitude stated that a trusting relationship between patient and therapist is more important than the right to have an attorney. This attitude gives partial support to the present Mental Health Care Act. However, the second most common attitude argues that involuntary hospitalization, if necessary, should be decided in a court and not by the hospital doctor.

Conclusions

Differences in attitude could partly be explained by the respondents' role in mental health care. Both psychiatrists and “somatic” physicians expressed more agreement with the present legislation than the other stakeholders. The findings may have implications for the legal protection of mental health care patients.