We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
A feeling of restrictiveness is often associated with coercive practices, such as seclusion or restraint. In addition to these obvious procedures more subtle practices can also feel restrictive. Its registration and monitoring is of special importance in forensic mental health care since feelings of restrictiveness can lead to adverse events like increased aggression and suicidal intentions.
Objectives
To enable the registration of the experience of restrictiveness in forensic mental health settings in Germany, the Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire was translated from English into German.
Methods
Method: We used the TRAPD approach presented by Harkness (2003). This approach combined the expertise of professional translators and clinical experts and enabled adaptation at an early stage. The developed version underwent a cognitive pretest with a small patient sample to check for comprehensibility and interpretation of the questions in line with the original authors intention.
Results
A preliminary translation of the FRQ was developed. Translators combined their expertise from linguistic and clinical practice as well as their knowledge about English and German culture to produce a translation as close as possible to the original questionnaire with necessary adaptations. Remaining uncertainties, e.g., regarding comprehensibility of long phrases or uniform interpretation of certain wordings or questions, were addressed in the cognitive pretest with patients. The version produced can be used for validation.
Conclusions
Conclusion: The TRAPD approach produced a comprehensible and well adapted German translation of the FRQ. This version underwent a cognitive pretest by a small patient sample and is now ready for validation.
Disclosure
No significant relationships.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.