The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.33.5.361

"Restrictiveness" is neither a narrow legal concept nor a clinical concept that encompasses all aspects of a patient and his treatment; it refers to several features of treatment that can infringe on individual freedoms. As part of a study to develop a reliable method to measure restrictiveness, 31 mental health professionals were asked to rate the restrictiveness of six dimensions of treatment, such as legal status, and 33 treatment alternatives. Interrater reliability was high for both the importance of dimensions (alpha = .92) and the restrictiveness of alternatives within dimensions (alpha = .99). The treatment dimension judged most important in assessing restrictiveness was "limitations of physical freedom." The scale resulting from these judgments offers a plausible measurement of the restrictiveness of treatment configurations for use in evaluation research. The authors caution that restrictiveness is not in itself a comprehensive index of the quality of psychiatric care.

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.