Course content – PF23-Deeskalation
| Site: | GermanSocialLab – Online-Fortbildung & Weiterbildung für soziale Berufe |
| Course: | De-escalation & Dealing with Challenging Behaviour |
| Book: | Course content – PF23-Deeskalation |
| Printed by: | Gast |
| Date: | Saturday, 24 October 2026, 5:32 AM |
Description
The modules of this course – work through them in order.
Table of contents
- 1. Module 1 · Fundamentals: Challenging Behaviour & De-escalation
- 2. Module 2 · Understanding Behaviour (as Communication)
- 3. Module 3 · Causes & Triggers
- 4. Module 4 · The Dynamics of Escalation
- 5. Module 5 · De-escalation: Basic Stance
- 6. Module 6 · Verbal De-escalation
- 7. Module 7 · Nonverbal De-escalation
- 8. Module 8 · Environment & Prevention
- 9. Module 9 · Self-protection & Safety
- 10. Module 10 · Aftercare & Follow-up
- 11. Module 11 · Special Situations
- 12. Module 12 · Self-reflection, Team & Summary
- 13. Checklists & practical aids
- 14. References & legal framework
1. Module 1 · Fundamentals: Challenging Behaviour & De-escalation
When behaviour challenges
In care, you will regularly meet challenging behaviour: behaviour that is difficult, distressing or dangerous for the people around the person, such as staff, fellow residents or relatives. It includes verbal or physical aggression (insulting, threatening, hitting, scratching, biting, throwing things), restlessness and agitation (walking about, fidgeting, trying to leave), resistance to care, loud calling or screaming, self-injury and withdrawal or apathy. The term ‘challenging behaviour’ replaces older, disparaging labels such as ‘problem behaviour’. It says that the behaviour challenges those around the person without condemning the person, because it is usually not malice but an expression of a need or distress (Module 2).
Professional handling has four parts: understanding the behaviour as communication and recognising its causes (Modules 2–3), de-escalation (Modules 5–7), prevention (Module 8) and safety (Module 9). De-escalation means deliberately preventing or reducing an escalation: calming a tense situation through calm, understanding and non-provocative behaviour. It is a core skill for safe, dignified care. It protects everyone involved, avoids violence and coercion, and addresses the actual causes.
Learning objectives of this module
- You know the term ‘challenging behaviour’.
- You understand it as an expression of needs/distress (not malice).
- You know the meaning of understanding, de-escalation, prevention and safety.
- You understand the concept and the aim of de-escalation.
From condemnation to understanding
The most important basic idea is the shift from condemnation to understanding. The traditional view judges the behaviour and the person: ‘He is aggressive’, ‘He only wants to provoke’, ‘He does it on purpose’. This view has three consequences. It labels the person and disregards their dignity. It hides the cause, because anyone who only sees ‘bad behaviour’ does not look for the need behind it. And it provokes the wrong reaction: annoyance and resistance lead to escalation, coercion or punishment. The professional view understands the behaviour as communication and the expression of a need or distress (Module 2): a message the person cannot express in any other way, such as pain, fear, being overwhelmed or an unmet need. This view respects the person’s dignity, opens the view to the cause and makes the right reaction possible. The key question changes from ‘How do I stop this behaviour?’ to ‘What is this person trying to tell me, and how can I help?’ This stance – behind the behaviour there is a person with a need – should guide every encounter. It is the basis for everything else in this course: recognising causes (Module 3), de-escalating (Modules 5–7) and prevention (Module 8).
Challenging behaviour & de-escalation
| Aspect | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Behaviour | Aggression, restlessness, resistance, calling out, etc. |
| Understanding | Expression of need/distress (not malice) |
| De-escalation | Defusing escalation calmly/with understanding |
| Scope | Understanding, de-escalating, preventing, securing |
Table: Challenging behaviour and de-escalation at a glance. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
De-escalation instead of coercion and violence
De-escalation matters so much because it offers an alternative to coercion and violence. When challenging behaviour is not understood, some people resort to freedom-restricting measures (FEM, such as restraints or locked doors), sedating medication used as ‘chemical restraint’, physical force or punishment. These reactions are harmful. They do not address the cause: the need remains unmet and the behaviour is only suppressed. They cause harm: they increase fear, helplessness and aggression, violate dignity and carry risks of their own. They are strictly regulated by law: freedom-restricting measures need a legal basis and are permitted only as a last resort, and violence is prohibited. And they can start a spiral of escalation, because force provokes more resistance. De-escalation is the better alternative, professionally and ethically. It looks for the cause and calms the situation without confrontation and without coercion. It is more effective, more dignified and safer, and it respects the law. For this reason, current German guidelines recommend prevention and de-escalation as the first response and coercive measures only as a last resort (BMG, 2007; DGPPN, 2026). De-escalation is therefore not just a technique but the expression of an understanding, non-violent stance.
Understanding instead of restraining
Mr M. (dementia) suddenly becomes aggressive during personal care: he lashes out and screams. An inexperienced staff member wants to hold him ‘for safety’. An experienced colleague chooses de-escalation instead. She interrupts the care, steps back, stays calm and speaks soothingly. Then she looks for the cause: Mr M. is evidently in pain when his arm is moved, and he is frightened by being touched without warning. She arranges for the pain to be treated, announces each step and tries again later, calmly and with a familiar person. The aggression subsides, and the care succeeds later without coercion.
Holding instead of understanding. The same morning, but this time no experienced colleague is nearby. The staff member holds Mr M.'s arms firmly so that she can finish washing him. Mr M. screams louder, pulls away and scratches her hand; afterwards he has a red mark on his forearm. The care is broken off. For the rest of the day Mr M. is tense and refuses every approach. Nobody has found out yet that moving his arm causes him pain.
How to classify it: Holding a person against their will is coercion. It is only lawful in narrowly defined situations, for example to avert an acute danger, and never as a routine way of getting care done. Here it did not remove the cause (pain and fear), it increased the distress on both sides and put everyone at risk. The incident has to be documented and discussed in the team so that the next attempt starts with understanding instead of force.
| Aspect | Case study: de-escalation | Version B: holding |
|---|---|---|
| First reaction | interrupt, step back, stay calm | hold the arms to continue |
| View of the behaviour | expression of pain and fear | resistance that has to be overcome |
| Cause | pain identified and treated | remains unknown |
| Outcome | care succeeds later without coercion | care broken off, injuries on both sides |
| Dignity and law | respected | coercion without a lawful reason |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: Reflect on your stance: do you condemn challenging behaviour (‘aggressive/difficult’) or do you understand it (expression of distress/need)? Do you (or colleagues) resort to coercion – or to de-escalation/understanding? How could you understand and de-escalate more?
Show suggested approach
Think of a concrete situation from the last few weeks and answer three questions in writing: 1. Which words did I (or the team) use for the person – describing ("pulls his arm away when washed") or labelling ("is aggressive")? 2. What was the first reaction – stepping back and calming down, or continuing and holding? 3. Which need or distress could have been behind the behaviour (pain, fear, overload, an unmet need)?
If you find labels, rewrite them as observations. If the first reaction was to continue or hold, plan an alternative: interrupt, step back, speak calmly, look for the cause, try again later or with a familiar person.
- Challenging behaviour is usually the expression of a need or distress, not malice.
- Professional handling has four parts: understanding, de-escalation, prevention and safety.
- Coercion does not remove the cause; it is lawful only in narrowly defined situations and as a last resort.
- The key question changes from "How do I stop this?" to "What is this person trying to tell me?"
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. Which words do you or your team use when talking about people with challenging behaviour?
Show prompt
2. When did you last feel the urge to "just get it done" despite resistance?
Show prompt
3. Which needs or kinds of distress could lie behind the behaviour you meet most often?
Show prompt
References for this module
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [Federal Ministry of Health] (Ed.). (2007). Rahmenempfehlungen zum Umgang mit herausforderndem Verhalten bei Menschen mit Demenz in der stationären Altenhilfe [Framework recommendations on dealing with challenging behaviour in people with dementia in residential care]. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/Bericht_Rahmenempfehlungen_zum_Umgang_mit_herausforderndem_Verhalten_bei_Menschen_mit_Demenz_in_der_stationaeren_Altenhilfe.pdf
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) [German Civil Code], section 1831 Freiheitsentziehende Unterbringung und freiheitsentziehende Maßnahmen [deprivation of liberty through placement and freedom-restricting measures], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__1831.html
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN). (2026). S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen [S3 guideline: Avoiding coercion – prevention and treatment of aggressive behaviour in adults] (Version 3.0, AWMF register no. 038-022). https://register.awmf.org/de/leitlinien/detail/038-022
Strafgesetzbuch (StGB) [German Criminal Code], section 34 Rechtfertigender Notstand [necessity as justification], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__34.html
2. Module 2 · Understanding Behaviour (as Communication)
Behaviour is communication
The key to dealing with challenging behaviour is understanding that behaviour is communication. Aggression, restlessness, resistance or calling out rarely happen ‘for no reason’ or out of malice. They express something: a need, a state of distress or a feeling that the person cannot put into words, or does not want to. Behaviour is, in a sense, the person’s language – especially for people who cannot express themselves well verbally, for example because of dementia, aphasia or another communication impairment. The task of care is to decode this message: which need, distress or feeling lies behind the behaviour?
Common messages behind challenging behaviour are: pain (very common and often overlooked, especially when the person cannot say they are in pain); fear, for example of being touched without warning or of an unfamiliar place; unmet basic needs such as hunger, thirst, needing the toilet, feeling cold, tiredness or the need to move; being overwhelmed by too many stimuli or demands; loss of control and feeling patronised; being treated without respect; frustration at not being understood or not managing something; boredom; and illness-related causes such as dementia, delirium or mental illness. If you understand the message, you can address the cause – and the behaviour often settles.
Learning objectives of this module
- You understand behaviour as communication/an expression of needs.
- You decode the ‘message’ behind the behaviour.
- You know common causes (above all pain!, fear, needs).
- You address the cause instead of merely fighting the symptom.
The detective work: what lies behind it?
Finding the message behind the behaviour takes detective work: observing, asking and thinking with attention and empathy, because the cause is rarely obvious. Six questions help:
- Observe the behaviour and its circumstances. When, where and how does it occur, and what happened just before? Patterns give clues: ‘always during personal care’ may point to pain, fear or shame; ‘in the evening’ to tiredness or overstimulation; ‘only with certain people or actions’ to a specific trigger.
- Basic needs. Is the person in pain? Always check this first. Do they need the toilet? Are they hungry, thirsty, cold, hot or tired, or do they need to move? Meeting a simple need often resolves the behaviour.
- Feelings. Is the person afraid? Do they feel overwhelmed, crowded, controlled, offended, helpless or bored?
- Illness. Does dementia play a part, for example through disorientation or misperception? A sudden change may signal delirium – an acute confusion that often has a treatable cause and needs prompt medical assessment. A mental illness may also be involved.
- Environment. Is there noise, bustle, crowding or time pressure (Module 8)?
- Knowledge of the person. What do you know about their life story, preferences and earlier triggers? Ask relatives.
The answers show where to start: meet the need, ease the distress, avoid the trigger. Remedying the cause is more effective, more dignified and more lasting than fighting the symptom.
‘Messages’ behind behaviour
| Cause | Note |
|---|---|
| Pain (common!) | Always check first |
| Basic needs | Toilet, hunger, thirst, cold, movement |
| Fear/being overwhelmed | Things not understood, sensory overload, feeling crowded |
| Illness | Dementia, delirium, mental illness |
Table: Common ‘messages’ behind challenging behaviour. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Pain – the overlooked cause
Pain deserves special attention. It is one of the most common and most overlooked causes of challenging behaviour, and treating it often resolves the behaviour. A person in pain who cannot say so expresses it through behaviour: restlessness, resistance (especially when moved or touched during care), irritability, aggression, calling out, groaning or withdrawal. This is often not recognised as pain but misread as ‘aggression’, ‘uncooperativeness’ or ‘just the dementia’ – and met with coercion, sedation or blame instead of pain treatment. The person then suffers twice: from the untreated pain and from the wrong reaction. People at particular risk are those who cannot express pain well: people with dementia, aphasia or other communication impairments, people with reduced consciousness, and very old or seriously ill people.
The rule is: with challenging behaviour, always think of pain. Consider it as a possible cause, especially when resistance occurs during movement or care. Assess it: if the person can still answer, ask them first. If they can no longer report pain reliably, observe facial expression, sounds, breathing, body tension and defensive movements, if appropriate with an observation scale such as BESD, the German version of the PAINAD scale. A score supports your judgement; on its own it neither proves nor rules out pain. If you suspect pain, pass your observations on to the doctor, who decides on a treatment trial. If the behaviour improves with medically ordered pain treatment, this suggests that pain was a cause. This rule links de-escalation with pain management and dementia care (Deutsche Alzheimer Gesellschaft, 2022).
The cause discovered
Mrs K. (dementia) has become increasingly restless and aggressive over several days and resists care violently. The team sees this as ‘the dementia getting worse’ and considers sedatives. An attentive care worker does some detective work. She notices that Mrs K. resists and grimaces especially when she is moved and when her right side is washed, and suspects pain. She reports this, and the doctor finds a painful cause, such as an injury or an inflammation. After pain treatment, Mrs K. becomes calm again and accepts care.
Sedation instead of detective work. The same situation, but nobody looks for a pattern. Mrs K.’s behaviour is recorded as ‘aggressive, dementia worsening’, and the doctor is asked for a sedative. She now sleeps through much of the day, eats and drinks less and is unsteady on her feet. During care she still grimaces and pulls away when her right side is touched. The painful cause remains untreated.
How to classify it: The behaviour was taken as a symptom of the dementia, not as a message. Pain was not considered, although Mrs K. showed clear signs during movement. A sedative does not treat pain and brings risks of its own, such as falls, more confusion and drinking too little. If medication is given mainly to calm a person down or keep them from moving, it can count as a freedom-restricting measure. Such a measure needs the consent of the person or, if they cannot give it, of their legal representative; if it is used regularly or over a longer period in a care home or hospital, it also needs the approval of the court (§ 1831 BGB). The right steps are: observe, think of pain, report the observations to the doctor and have the medication reviewed.
| Aspect | Case study: detective work | Version B: sedation |
|---|---|---|
| View of the behaviour | a message – possibly pain | symptom of ‘worsening dementia’ |
| Observation | grimacing during movement, right side | nothing systematic |
| Action | observations reported to the doctor | sedative requested |
| Cause | found and treated | remains untreated |
| Outcome | calm, accepts care again | drowsy, risk of falls, still in pain |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: In the case of challenging behaviour, do you do ‘detective work’ (when/where/how? which need/distress?)? Do you always think of pain too (especially in people who cannot communicate)? Do you address the cause – instead of merely fighting the symptom?
Show suggested approach
Choose one person whose behaviour you find challenging and go through the six questions in writing: 1. When, where and how does the behaviour occur, and what happens just before? 2. Could pain or an unmet basic need be involved? 3. Which feelings could play a part? 4. Is there an illness-related cause – and has anything changed suddenly (then inform the doctor promptly)? 5. What is the environment like? 6. What do you know about the person’s life story – and what could relatives add?
Write down one possible message and one small step to try out, for example offering a drink and the toilet before care, or announcing each step. If pain is possible: ask the person if they can still answer; otherwise observe in a structured way (e.g. with BESD) and pass your observations on to the doctor. Observe for a few days whether the behaviour changes and document it.
- Challenging behaviour is a message: a need, distress or feeling the person cannot put into words.
- Detective work – observing, asking about needs and feelings, using what you know about the person – uncovers the cause.
- Always think of pain, especially in people who cannot report it; ask first, observe if they cannot answer.
- Address the cause instead of suppressing the symptom – this is more effective, more dignified and more lasting.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. Think of a person whose behaviour you find hard. What might they be trying to tell you?
Show prompt
2. How do you notice pain in people who cannot tell you about it?
Show prompt
3. When has a quick explanation such as ‘that’s just the dementia’ stopped you or your team from looking further?
Show prompt
4. Which information about a person’s life story would help you understand their behaviour better?
Show prompt
References for this module
Arbeitskreis Schmerz und Alter der Deutschen Schmerzgesellschaft [Working group on pain and old age of the German Pain Society]. (2013). Hinweise zur Verwendung von BESD (Beurteilung von Schmerzen bei Demenz) [Notes on using BESD (assessment of pain in dementia)]. https://www.schmerzgesellschaft.de/fileadmin/pdf/BESD_Kurzanleitung_130626.pdf
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [Federal Ministry of Health] (Ed.). (2007). Rahmenempfehlungen zum Umgang mit herausforderndem Verhalten bei Menschen mit Demenz in der stationären Altenhilfe [Framework recommendations on dealing with challenging behaviour in people with dementia in residential care]. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/Bericht_Rahmenempfehlungen_zum_Umgang_mit_herausforderndem_Verhalten_bei_Menschen_mit_Demenz_in_der_stationaeren_Altenhilfe.pdf
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) [German Civil Code], section 1831 Freiheitsentziehende Unterbringung und freiheitsentziehende Maßnahmen [deprivation of liberty through placement and freedom-restricting measures], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__1831.html
Deutsche Alzheimer Gesellschaft [German Alzheimer Society]. (2022). Informationsblatt 18: Schmerz erkennen und behandeln [Information sheet 18: Recognising and treating pain]. https://www.deutsche-alzheimer.de/fileadmin/alz/pdf/factsheets/infoblatt18_schmerz_erkennen_dalzg.pdf
3. Module 3 · Causes & Triggers
Why escalation occurs
Prevention and de-escalation need a clear view of causes and triggers. Causes are the underlying reasons and conditions. Triggers are the specific stimuli or situations that set the behaviour off at a particular moment. Causes (Module 2) can be physical (pain, illness, unmet basic needs, side effects of medication), psychological (fear, being overwhelmed, loss of control, offence, frustration, boredom), illness-related (dementia with disorientation and misperception, delirium, mental illness) or environmental (noise, bustle, crowding, time pressure, unsuitable surroundings). Often several act together. The framework recommendations of the German Federal Ministry of Health describe a similar idea: background factors that are hard to change, and nearby factors – such as pain, hunger, noise or changing staff – that can trigger behaviour and are easier to influence (BMG, 2007).
Triggers differ from person to person. Common ones are: certain care situations, especially personal care with closeness, exposure and movement; being touched or addressed without warning; feeling patronised, controlled or forced; disrespectful treatment; too many stimuli or demands; frustration at not being understood or at a need not being met; time pressure in care; misunderstandings; and individual triggers such as certain people, words or situations, often rooted in the person’s life story. Knowing these triggers through observation, documentation and relatives makes it possible to avoid them (Module 8). Addressing causes and avoiding triggers together prevents a great deal of challenging behaviour.
Learning objectives of this module
- You distinguish between causes and triggers.
- You know the most important causes (physical, psychological, illness-related, environment-related).
- You know common triggers.
- You use this knowledge for prevention.
How care itself can be a trigger
An important and self-critical insight is that care itself is often the trigger. This is easily overlooked, because people tend to look for the ‘blame’ in the person’s behaviour rather than in their own actions. Typical triggers in care are:
- The type of care. Intimate personal care in particular involves closeness, exposure, touch and shame. A person with dementia may not understand what is happening and feel attacked.
- The way it is done. Acting without warning or in a hurry, handling the person roughly, or deciding over their head and forcing them.
- Disrespectful communication. Talking down, ‘baby talk’, talking about the person instead of to them, not taking them seriously.
- Lack of relationship. An unfamiliar carer whom the person does not yet trust.
The good news: if your own actions are the trigger, you can change them. Announce and explain each step. Work calmly and without rushing, as gently and painlessly as possible. Speak respectfully and at eye level. Respect the person’s wishes instead of overriding them. Involve familiar people and build trust. If the person resists, pause, calm the situation and try again later or in a different way – without coercion. This is often one of the most effective ways to prevent challenging behaviour. It requires self-reflection (Module 12) and the willingness to see your own role as a possible trigger.
Causes & triggers
| Level | Examples |
|---|---|
| Physical | Pain, needs, delirium, illness |
| Psychological | Fear, being overwhelmed, loss of control, offence |
| Triggers (care!) | Unannounced, hurried, rough, patronising |
| Environment | Sensory overload, noise, bustle, crowding |
Table: Causes and triggers at a glance. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Knowing and documenting individual triggers
Besides common triggers, each person often has individual triggers: particular stimuli, situations, actions, people or words. They are often rooted in the person’s life story – for example a touch or situation that recalls an earlier trauma or bad experience, or a word that offends – or related to personality or illness. One person reacts aggressively when touched from behind, another when feeling crowded or controlled, a third to certain noises. Such triggers are rarely obvious. They become visible through observation (when and in what situation does the behaviour occur?), documentation (over time a pattern emerges) and the knowledge of relatives, who often know the person’s history. Knowing the triggers allows targeted prevention (Module 8): you avoid them or arrange the situation differently, before the behaviour occurs. Avoiding is better than de-escalating afterwards. In practice: identify the triggers through detective work (Module 2); document them together with the approaches that have helped, so that the whole team acts consistently; ask relatives; and adapt care accordingly. This links prevention with person-centred, biography-oriented care and teamwork.
The trigger identified
Mr B. (dementia) often becomes aggressive during personal care – apparently for no reason. The team observes and documents carefully and identifies a trigger: he reacts aggressively when touched from behind or without warning. His relatives confirm that, as a former soldier, he was always very watchful and disliked unexpected touch from behind. The team changes its approach: it approaches him from the front, announces each step, moves slowly and keeps eye contact. In the following weeks, the aggressive reactions during care no longer occur.
Holding instead of observing. Mr B.’s care plan only says ‘aggressive during personal care’. Nobody records when exactly the reactions occur, and the relatives are not asked. To be quick, one carer washes him from behind while a second holds his hands. Mr B. shouts, pulls free and hits out; a carer is hurt. The team now considers asking the doctor for calming medication.
How to classify it: The trigger – being touched from behind without warning – was never identified, and the way care was given set it off again and again. An entry such as ‘aggressive’ labels the person but gives the team nothing to work with. Holding someone against their will is coercion. It can only be justified to avert an acute danger that cannot be averted in any other way (§ 34 StGB) – never as a routine way of getting care done. The incident should be documented and discussed in a case review; the team should then observe systematically, ask the relatives and adapt its approach.
| Aspect | Case study: trigger identified | Version B: holding |
|---|---|---|
| Documentation | when, where, what came before | only ‘aggressive’ |
| Relatives | asked – life story known | not involved |
| Trigger | identified: touch from behind | unknown, set off again and again |
| Approach | from the front, announced, slowly | from behind, hands held |
| Outcome | aggressive reactions stop | injury, medication considered |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: Do you know the causes and individual triggers of your residents? Reflect: is your own way of acting (unannounced, hurried, rough, patronising) sometimes the trigger? Do you document triggers and successful ways of handling? Do you avoid the triggers?
Show suggested approach
Choose one resident and, for one to two weeks, note every situation in which challenging behaviour occurs: time and place, activity, who was present, what happened just before, what the person did and what helped. Then look for patterns. Ask relatives about the person’s life story, habits and fears.
Check your own actions honestly: was the care announced? Was it hurried, rough or done over the person’s head? Record the triggers you identify and the approaches that helped in the care plan so that the whole team uses them, and review them after a few weeks.
- Causes are the background; triggers set the behaviour off at a particular moment.
- Care itself is often the trigger – and your own actions are what you can change most directly.
- Individual triggers are often rooted in the person’s life story; observation, documentation and relatives reveal them.
- Documented triggers and helpful approaches let the whole team prevent behaviour before it starts.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. Which of your own routines in care could feel like an ‘ambush’ to a person with dementia?
Show prompt
2. How does your team record challenging behaviour – with labels or with observations?
Show prompt
3. What do you know about the life story of the people you care for, and where could you learn more?
Show prompt
4. Which situations make you yourself tense or impatient during care?
Show prompt
References for this module
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [Federal Ministry of Health] (Ed.). (2007). Rahmenempfehlungen zum Umgang mit herausforderndem Verhalten bei Menschen mit Demenz in der stationären Altenhilfe [Framework recommendations on dealing with challenging behaviour in people with dementia in residential care]. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/Bericht_Rahmenempfehlungen_zum_Umgang_mit_herausforderndem_Verhalten_bei_Menschen_mit_Demenz_in_der_stationaeren_Altenhilfe.pdf
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN). (2026). S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen [S3 guideline: Avoiding coercion – prevention and treatment of aggressive behaviour in adults] (Version 3.0, AWMF register no. 038-022). https://register.awmf.org/de/leitlinien/detail/038-022
Strafgesetzbuch (StGB) [German Criminal Code], section 34 Rechtfertigender Notstand [necessity as justification], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__34.html
4. Module 4 · The Dynamics of Escalation
How escalation arises
To de-escalate, it helps to understand the dynamics of escalation: how a situation builds up from calm to aggression. Escalation usually develops in stages that build on each other if nobody responds. In a simplified model, it starts with tension and restlessness (first signs), grows into increasing agitation (more irritable, louder, more resistant), may turn into open aggression (verbal or physical) and finally subsides in a recovery phase. Sometimes, however, the stages pass very quickly or the early signs are hard to see, for example in delirium or advanced dementia. The practical consequence: the earlier you intervene, the easier and more effective de-escalation is. That is why recognising early warning signs and acting early are central.
Early warning signs can include growing tension and restlessness (tense posture, nervousness), irritability (sharp tone, impatience), changes in facial expression and body language (angry look, clenched fists, threatening gestures), louder or faster speech, sudden withdrawal or getting worked up, and signs that are typical of the individual. If you notice them, you can de-escalate in good time: address the cause or need, respond calmly and with understanding, remove the trigger and create calm. This is far easier than calming open aggression – and it protects everyone.
Learning objectives of this module
- You understand the dynamics of escalation (stages/phases).
- You recognise the early warning signs of an incipient escalation.
- You know that early de-escalation is the most effective.
- You intervene early.
The earlier, the better
The most important practical principle is: the earlier you de-escalate, the easier and more effective it is. In the early phase, the person is still approachable: they can listen, think and be calmed to some extent. Addressing the cause, a calm response and a quieter setting often settle the situation. In the late phase of open aggression, the person is in an emotional state of emergency and hardly accessible to reason. De-escalation is then much harder, and safety comes first (Module 9). In practice this means:
- Watch for the early warning signs – do not wait, ignore them or simply carry on.
- Look for the reason behind the rising tension and address it early.
- De-escalate early: respond calmly, create calm, reduce stress and meet the need (Modules 5–7).
- If necessary, interrupt a stressful activity – for example a care task that causes resistance – and try again later or differently instead of pushing through.
Your own behaviour is part of the dynamics from the very beginning: calm behaviour counteracts the escalation, while confrontational or hurried behaviour fuels it (see below). Recognising early signs and acting in good time can prevent or reduce many escalations.
Dynamics of escalation
| Phase | Feature / action |
|---|---|
| Tension/restlessness | Early warning signs – de-escalate early! |
| Growing agitation | Irritable, louder – still open to influence |
| Open aggression | Hardly approachable – safety takes priority |
| Relaxation | Subsiding – aftercare (Module 10) |
Table: Phases of escalation and what to do. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Your own behaviour as part of the dynamics
Escalation is often an interaction between the people involved, not just ‘the person’s behaviour’. With your own behaviour, you can fuel or defuse it. Escalating behaviour is confrontational or threatening: contradicting, lecturing, reproaching, belittling, threatening, showing power, rushing, a loud or sharp voice, threatening body language, crowding the person, coercion. The person feels attacked, threatened or patronised and becomes more agitated – a vicious circle develops. De-escalating behaviour is calm and non-threatening: composure, listening, a calm voice, open body language, acknowledging feelings, no contradiction or provocation. The person feels heard and safe, and the tension can fall.
Your reaction is never neutral. A common mistake is to answer tension with tension. In practice: shape your own behaviour deliberately to be calm and non-confrontational (Modules 5–7), especially when a situation is getting tense; reflect on your own triggers – what makes you irritable? (Module 12); and see your own part in the dynamics instead of holding only the person responsible. Staying calm under provocation takes self-control and practice. It is not always easy, but it can be learned – and it is often decisive.
Recognised early, de-escalated early
A care worker notices early signs of growing tension in Mr K.: an irritable tone, restless movements, a tense face. Instead of carrying on or reacting irritably herself, she intervenes early and calmly. She interrupts the stressful activity, stays calm and friendly and asks what he needs. It turns out that Mr K. is overwhelmed and needs a break. She creates calm and gives him time. The tension subsides, and the escalation is prevented.
Carrying on. The same morning, but the care worker is behind schedule. She notices Mr K.’s irritable tone but wants to finish: ‘We’re nearly done – stop that now.’ When he pushes her hand away, she raises her voice and carries on. Mr K. shouts, knocks a cup off the table and raises his fist. She steps back out of reach and calls a colleague. It takes a long time before he calms down, and both are shaken.
How to classify it: The early warning signs were seen but not acted on. Time pressure, a raised voice and continuing the care fuelled the escalation until open aggression was reached – the phase in which de-escalation is hardest and safety comes first (Module 9). Stepping back and getting help was right at that point. Anyone who is attacked may defend themselves, but only with what is necessary to stop the attack (self-defence, § 32 StGB). Afterwards, both need aftercare (Module 10); the incident should be documented and discussed in the team so that the next time, the early signs lead to a pause.
| Aspect | Case study: early de-escalation | Version B: carrying on |
|---|---|---|
| Early warning signs | noticed and acted on | noticed, but ignored |
| Own behaviour | calm, interrupts, asks | time pressure, raised voice |
| Need behind it | overwhelmed, needs a break – recognised | not explored |
| Phase reached | tension | open aggression |
| Outcome | escalation prevented | threat, both shaken, aftercare needed |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: Do you recognise the early warning signs of an incipient escalation (tension, irritability, changed body language)? Do you intervene early (instead of waiting)? Reflect on your own behaviour: do you de-escalate or escalate (through calm vs. confrontation)?
Show suggested approach
1. Early signs: For one person you care for, write down their individual early warning signs – what changes in voice, face, posture or movement before a situation becomes tense? Ask colleagues and relatives what they notice. 2. What helps: Note what has calmed the person in the early phase (a break, a drink, a familiar person, a quieter room, a different time).
3. Your own part: In which situations do you react with tension yourself – time pressure, insults, tiredness? Choose a personal ‘stop signal’, for example a deep breath, half a step back or lowering your voice. 4. Team: Document the early signs and helpful approaches in the care plan so that everyone can act early.
- Escalation usually builds up in stages: tension, agitation, open aggression, recovery – sometimes very quickly.
- The earlier you act, the easier de-escalation is; in open aggression, safety comes first.
- Know the person’s early warning signs and respond to them – pause instead of carrying on.
- Your own behaviour is part of the dynamics: calm defuses, confrontation fuels.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. Which early signs do you notice in the people you care for before a situation becomes tense?
Show prompt
2. How do you react when you are under time pressure and someone resists?
Show prompt
3. What helps you personally to stay calm when you are provoked?
Show prompt
4. Think of a situation you managed to defuse early. What exactly did you do?
Show prompt
References for this module
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN). (2026). S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen [S3 guideline: Avoiding coercion – prevention and treatment of aggressive behaviour in adults] (Version 3.0, AWMF register no. 038-022). https://register.awmf.org/de/leitlinien/detail/038-022
Deutsche Gesetzliche Unfallversicherung (DGUV) [German Social Accident Insurance]. (2018). Prävention von Gewalt und Aggression gegen Beschäftigte im Gesundheitsdienst und in der Wohlfahrtspflege: Eine Handlungshilfe für Arbeitgeber und Arbeitgeberinnen [Preventing violence and aggression against employees in health and social care: A guide for employers] (DGUV Information 207-025). https://publikationen.dguv.de/widgets/pdf/download/article/3429
Strafgesetzbuch (StGB) [German Criminal Code], section 32 Notwehr [self-defence], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__32.html
5. Module 5 · De-escalation: Basic Stance
Calm as the key
Every de-escalation starts with the right inner stance – even before the techniques in Modules 6 and 7. Its most important element is calm: staying composed yourself, especially when a situation is tense or aggressive. Your calm transfers to the other person and lets you act with a clear head. Agitation, panic or irritability transfer too: they provoke and lead to rash action. Staying calm under threat is not easy, because your own stress alarm goes off. But it can be learned – through deliberate self-control and breathing, inner distance (not taking the aggression personally, Module 2) and practice.
Further elements of the basic stance are: understanding the behaviour as an expression of distress instead of condemning the person (Modules 1 and 2); not taking aggression personally, because it is usually an expression of distress or illness and not really aimed at you (Module 2); respect for the person’s dignity, even in conflict; empathy, which means taking the person’s feelings seriously; calm self-confidence that is never threatening or superior; and a visible willingness to help. The verbal and nonverbal techniques build on this stance. Without it, they work much less well.
Learning objectives of this module
- You know the de-escalating basic stance.
- You understand calm as the key.
- You do not take aggression personally.
- You combine calm, understanding, respect and empathy.
Staying calm when things get difficult
Your own calm is the centre of de-escalation – and often the hardest part. In a threatening situation the body raises the alarm: tension, a racing heart, fear or anger, the urge to fight or flee. This alarm pushes you towards a reflex: fighting back (shouting back, defending yourself, confronting), panicking or freezing. These reflexes usually make things worse. Confrontation escalates (Module 4), panic is contagious, and freezing prevents clear action. Deliberate calm means noticing the reflex and controlling it.
Six things help you to do this. Self-control and breathing: notice your stress reaction, breathe slowly and deeply, and tell yourself to stay calm. Inner distance: see the aggression as an expression of distress or illness, not as a personal attack (Module 2) – “this is not about me, this is their distress”. An understanding stance (Modules 1 and 2): if you see the behaviour as a need, you respond with empathy rather than irritation. Knowledge and preparation: knowing how de-escalation works gives you confidence. Experience and practice, including de-escalation training, make calm action easier over time (NICE, 2015). Your own safety (Module 9): knowing about distance, your escape route and how to get help reduces fear – and fear makes calm impossible. Calm is the foundation for every technique and has a calming effect in itself. It is not always easy, but it can be learned and is worth working on deliberately.
De-escalating basic stance
| Element | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Calm | Stay calm/composed yourself (key!) |
| Understanding | Understand behaviour as distress (do not condemn) |
| Not taking it personally | Aggression = expression of distress, not against me |
| Respect & empathy | Respect dignity, take feelings seriously |
Table: Elements of the de-escalating basic stance. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Empathy and safety at the same time
Empathy and safety are sometimes seen as opposites: either you give in with understanding, or you set hard boundaries. In good de-escalation they belong together. Empathy (Modules 1 and 2) lets you understand the behaviour as distress, respond without condemning and so defuse the situation – the person feels understood. Without empathy, confrontation looms. Safety (Module 9) means protecting yourself and others through distance, an escape route and help, and appearing calmly confident rather than fearful. Without safety, there is danger – and fear for yourself makes calm impossible.
In practice, you meet the person with understanding and keep your own safety in view (DGPPN, 2026; NICE, 2015). This avoids two extremes: fearfully giving in without protecting yourself, and coldly confronting without empathy. Two points are important. Empathy does not mean accepting violence. You can understand the behaviour and protect yourself at the same time; if there is a serious threat, safety takes priority and nobody has to put themselves in danger (Module 9). Safety does not mean being cold. You can protect yourself calmly, without confrontation or force. Protecting yourself is allowed; physical defence is lawful only as far as it is necessary to stop a present, unlawful attack (self-defence, section 32 StGB). With people who cannot control their behaviour because of illness, stepping away and getting help come first.
Calm in the storm
Mr M. suddenly becomes very aggressive, shouts and threatens. The care worker feels her own alarm – fear and the urge to resist – but deliberately stays calm. She breathes slowly, recognises the aggression as an expression of his distress and fear rather than a personal attack, and speaks calmly and with understanding. At the same time she keeps her distance and her escape route in view. Her calm transfers to Mr M., she can address what is troubling him, and the situation eases.
The stress reflex takes over. The same situation, but this time the care worker reacts on reflex. She raises her voice (“Stop that right now!”), steps towards Mr M. and points at him. Mr M. feels attacked, shouts louder and knocks a cup off the table. Frightened, the care worker leaves the room and calls a colleague. Nobody has found out what was troubling Mr M.
How to classify it: The stress reaction is natural and not a personal failure. But acting on it – raising the voice, stepping closer, pointing – escalated the situation. Leaving the room and calling for help was the right step once the danger grew. The team should talk through the incident afterwards, practise calming routines and look for the cause of Mr M.’s distress.
| Aspect | Case study: deliberate calm | Version B: stress reflex |
|---|---|---|
| Inner reaction | alarm noticed and controlled | alarm acted on |
| Voice and body | calm voice, distance kept | raised voice, steps closer, points |
| View of the behaviour | expression of distress and fear | personal attack that must be stopped |
| Safety | distance and escape route in view | danger grows, she has to leave |
| Outcome | situation eases, cause can be addressed | escalation, cause unknown |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: Can you stay calm in tense situations, despite your own alarm? Do you avoid taking aggression personally? Do you combine empathy and safety? How could you strengthen your calm – through breathing, inner distance or practice?
Show suggested approach
Take a recent tense situation and go through it in writing: 1. How did you notice your own alarm (heartbeat, heat, tension, the urge to answer back)? 2. What did you do in the first seconds – fight back, freeze, step back or calm down? 3. Was your safety ensured (distance, free exit, help nearby)?
Then put together a short personal calming routine you can use next time, for example: breathe out slowly, take half a step back, lower your voice, say an inner sentence such as “This is their distress, not about me”, and check your exit. Practise it in calm moments so that it is available under stress.
- Calm is the key to de-escalation: it transfers to the other person and lets you act with a clear head.
- The stress alarm is natural; deliberate calm means noticing the reflex and controlling it.
- Inner distance, an understanding stance, knowledge, practice and safety all help you to stay calm.
- Empathy and safety belong together – understanding the person never means accepting violence.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. How does your body tell you that your own alarm is going off?
Show prompt
2. Which reflex is most typical for you under stress – fighting back, fleeing or freezing?
Show prompt
3. Which sentence could help you to keep inner distance in a heated moment?
Show prompt
4. What do you need from your team so that you can stay calm and safe?
Show prompt
References for this module
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN). (2026). S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen [S3 guideline: Avoiding coercion – prevention and treatment of aggressive behaviour in adults] (Version 3.0, AWMF register no. 038-022). https://register.awmf.org/de/leitlinien/detail/038-022
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2015). Violence and aggression: Short-term management in mental health, health and community settings (NICE guideline NG10). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng10
Strafgesetzbuch (StGB) [German Criminal Code], section 32 Notwehr [self-defence], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__32.html
6. Module 6 · Verbal De-escalation
Calming with words
Verbal de-escalation means calming a person deliberately through language. It builds on the basic stance from Module 5. The key principles are: a calm, friendly voice – speak calmly, warmly and slowly, because the tone often has a stronger effect than the words; active listening – let the person finish and ‘let off steam’ without interrupting; acknowledging and naming feelings (‘I can see that you are very angry’), so that the person feels heard; showing understanding (‘I understand that this makes you uneasy’); simple, clear language with short sentences, because an agitated or confused person cannot process anything complex; offering help (‘I would like to help you – let us find a solution together’); and I-messages instead of reproaches.
Just as important is what you avoid: arguing, contradicting and lecturing – above all, do not correct a person with dementia who perceives reality differently; reproaches, belittling and criticism; threats, ultimatums and shows of power; orders such as ‘You must now …’; irony and condescension; and a hurried, impatient or loud tone. The aim is that the person feels heard, understood, taken seriously and not threatened (NICE, 2015). This is what calms a situation.
Learning objectives of this module
- You know the principles of verbal de-escalation.
- You calm through a calm voice, listening, acknowledging feelings.
- You avoid contradiction, reproaches, threats, lecturing.
- You give the person the feeling of being heard and understood.
Acknowledging the feeling – a powerful de-escalator
Among the verbal techniques, acknowledging and naming feelings is often one of the most effective. An upset person is in an emotional state of emergency, driven by anger, fear, despair, helplessness or hurt (Modules 2 and 3). At that moment their greatest need is often to be heard and taken seriously. Sentences such as ‘I can see that you are very angry’ or ‘I notice that you are worried’ meet exactly this need. The emotional pressure eases, and the person becomes more willing to calm down and talk. Many escalations grow because a person feels ignored; acknowledging the feeling breaks this cycle.
Two points matter. Acknowledging the feeling does not mean agreeing with the person on the matter or meeting a demand. You acknowledge the feeling, which is real. The matter can be clarified, and boundaries set, later when the agitation has subsided. And it is not a trick but genuine empathy (Modules 2 and 5). In practice: perceive the feeling, name and acknowledge it calmly, then listen and offer help.
Verbal de-escalation
| Do | Avoid |
|---|---|
| Calm, friendly voice | Loud/curt tone of voice, bustle |
| Listen, let them ‘let off steam’ | Interrupting, lecturing |
| Acknowledge/name feelings | Contradiction, reproaches, belittling |
| Signal understanding/help | Threats, demonstrations of power, coercion |
Table: What to do and what to avoid in verbal de-escalation. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Not arguing, not wanting to be right
A common mistake in tense situations is arguing and wanting to be right. Faced with an accusation that seems unfair, the natural impulse is to contradict or justify yourself: ‘That is simply not true!’ or ‘You are seeing that wrongly.’ In an acute situation this usually escalates. The upset person cannot take in facts at that moment and experiences contradiction as an attack or as not being taken seriously. A ‘fight about being right’ builds up. In the acute situation the goal is calming, not being right. Clarifying the facts can wait until the agitation has subsided.
This is especially important with delusions, misperceptions or the altered reality of dementia – for example ‘I have been robbed’, or ‘My mother is waiting for me’ about a mother who has died. Correcting the person (‘Nobody has robbed you’, ‘Your mother is dead’) does not help, because they cannot see the reality you see. It increases fear and mistrust, and it hurts. Instead, do not argue or correct: validate the feelings behind the words, give security and, where it fits, distract (BMG, 2007). Holding back the urge to put things right is not easy, but it is decisive for de-escalation.
‘My money has been stolen!’
Mrs L., who has dementia, angrily accuses the care worker of stealing her money. The first impulse would be to contradict: ‘That is not true, nobody has stolen your money!’ – but that would escalate and hurt. Instead, the care worker does not argue. She acknowledges Mrs L.’s feelings: ‘It is annoying and upsetting that you cannot find your money – I understand that you are worried.’ She stays calm, gives security and offers to look for the money together. Mrs L. calms down.
Being right instead of calming. Mrs L. makes the same accusation. This time the care worker contradicts at once: “Nobody has stolen anything! You have put it somewhere yourself, as always.” Mrs L. becomes louder, calls her a thief and a liar, refuses all help for the rest of the morning and phones her daughter in tears.
How to classify it: The care worker may even have been right about the facts. But the correction ignored Mrs L.’s fear, and “as always” was a reproach. In an acute situation, and especially with dementia, contradiction escalates. A real loss must still be taken seriously: once Mrs L. is calm, the team checks whether money is actually missing, without accusing anyone, follows the home’s procedure if necessary and agrees with the relatives how money is kept.
| Aspect | Case study: validating | Version B: contradicting |
|---|---|---|
| First reaction | acknowledges worry and annoyance | contradicts and corrects at once |
| Message received | “You are taken seriously.” | “You are wrong and forgetful.” |
| Facts | looked for together, clarified later | argued about in the acute situation |
| Outcome | Mrs L. calms down | escalation, care refused |
| Relationship | trust strengthened | trust damaged |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: Do you de-escalate verbally – with a calm voice, listening, acknowledging feelings and understanding – or do you sometimes escalate with contradiction, reproaches or lecturing? Can you hold back the urge to be right? Do you validate instead of correcting when a person with dementia perceives reality differently?
Show suggested approach
Choose two typical situations from your work, for example a complaint about waiting time and an accusation by a person with dementia. For each, write down: 1. What would your first, spontaneous sentence be? 2. Which feeling is behind the other person’s words (anger, fear, worry, helplessness)? 3. A sentence that names this feeling, for example “I can see that you are worried about your money.”
Then check your first sentence: does it contain contradiction, a reproach or a lecture? If so, replace it with the acknowledging sentence plus an offer of help. Note what can be clarified later, once the person is calm.
- A calm, friendly voice, listening and short, clear sentences calm a person more than arguments do.
- Acknowledging and naming the feeling is often one of the most effective verbal de-escalators.
- Acknowledging the feeling does not mean agreeing with the demand – the matter can be clarified later.
- With dementia or delusions, do not correct: validate the feeling, give security and, where it fits, distract.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. Which sentence do you catch yourself saying when someone accuses you unfairly?
Show prompt
2. How easy is it for you to name another person’s feeling out loud?
Show prompt
3. In which situations is the urge to be right especially strong for you?
Show prompt
References for this module
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [Federal Ministry of Health] (Ed.). (2007). Rahmenempfehlungen zum Umgang mit herausforderndem Verhalten bei Menschen mit Demenz in der stationären Altenhilfe [Framework recommendations on dealing with challenging behaviour in people with dementia in residential care]. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/Bericht_Rahmenempfehlungen_zum_Umgang_mit_herausforderndem_Verhalten_bei_Menschen_mit_Demenz_in_der_stationaeren_Altenhilfe.pdf
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN). (2026). S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen [S3 guideline: Avoiding coercion – prevention and treatment of aggressive behaviour in adults] (Version 3.0, AWMF register no. 038-022). https://register.awmf.org/de/leitlinien/detail/038-022
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2015). Violence and aggression: Short-term management in mental health, health and community settings (NICE guideline NG10). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng10
7. Module 7 · Nonverbal De-escalation
De-escalating with the body
Alongside language (Module 6), nonverbal de-escalation – through body language, presence and space – is of great importance; the nonverbal level often has a stronger effect than the words. In a tense situation the person perceives your body language very precisely, often unconsciously. A calm, open, non-threatening presence de-escalates; a threatening, superior or hurried one escalates. The key principles are: a calm, open posture – relaxed, no crossed arms, no threatening gestures or fists; calm, slow movements – nothing jerky that could startle; visible, open hands – open palms signal ‘no threat’, so not in your pockets, behind your back or clenched; eye contact without staring – attentive and calm, never a fixed, challenging stare; a calm, friendly facial expression; and attention to space and distance.
Space and distance are particularly important. Keep an appropriate distance: too much closeness feels threatening, escalates and endangers your own safety – an upset person needs room. Do not push the person into a corner or a confined space, as this creates panic and resistance; leave both of you a way out. Do not tower over the person or block their way – where possible, be at eye level. And keep your own escape route free (Module 9). Together with verbal de-escalation, this signals ‘no threat, calm, safety’ (NICE, 2015).
Learning objectives of this module
- You know the principles of nonverbal de-escalation.
- You present yourself calmly, openly and non-threateningly.
- You keep an appropriate distance and space.
- You do not push the person into a corner and you heed your own safety.
Giving space, avoiding threat
Two related principles deserve a closer look: giving space and avoiding threat. Both de-escalate, and both protect your safety. An upset person has an increased need for space and reacts sensitively to closeness. Stepping into their personal space or crowding them feels threatening and can lead to panic, resistance or aggression. So keep an appropriate, rather larger distance, do not move in on the person while agitation is high, and leave them freedom of movement and a way out. Distance also gives you time to react if an attack occurs (Module 9).
Avoiding threat means avoiding anything that looks superior or dominant: towering over the person, a wide dominant stance, crossed arms, a pointing finger, fists, sweeping or jerky movements, blocking the way, staring. Several staff members approaching at once can also feel like a show of force. Help may be needed for safety, but the presence should not be needlessly threatening; ideally one person leads the conversation (NICE, 2015). Instead, choose a calm, open posture, as far as possible at eye level, with open hands, calm movements and a calm face. If you lower yourself to eye level, for example next to a seated person, make sure you can still stand up and step back quickly. Never put yourself in a corner or without an escape route (Module 9).
Nonverbal de-escalation
| Element | De-escalating |
|---|---|
| Posture | Calm, open, not threatening, at eye level |
| Hands/movements | Visible, open; calm, slow |
| Gaze/facial expression | Attentive (no staring), calm and friendly |
| Space/distance | Appropriate, not crowding/confining (+ safety) |
Table: Elements of nonverbal de-escalation. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Congruence of verbal and nonverbal de-escalation
De-escalation works best when the verbal and nonverbal levels agree (congruence) and send the same message. If they contradict each other – calming words, but tense body language or an irritable tone – the message seems implausible. The nonverbal level is usually perceived more strongly and ‘wins’: someone who says ‘Stay calm, I want to help you’ while appearing hurried, tense or crowding the person is experienced as a threat, and the de-escalation fails. Effective de-escalation therefore needs calm words, listening and acknowledging feelings (Module 6) and calm, open body language at an appropriate distance (Module 7) – both saying ‘calm, no threat, understanding, help’.
The basis of congruence is inner calm (Module 5). Only someone who is calm inside comes across as authentically calm, because inner tension shows in the body and the voice. The tone of voice (the paraverbal level) also has to fit: calm, warm and friendly, not irritable, loud, curt or condescending. In practice, pay attention to all levels – not just the right words – and keep working on your inner calm.
The right distance
Mr K. is highly agitated, clenches his fists and shouts. An inexperienced staff member steps close to him to ‘calm him down’ – Mr K. feels threatened and escalates further. An experienced colleague does it differently. She keeps a rather larger distance, stands calmly and openly with visible hands and slow movements, and speaks calmly and with understanding. She does not crowd Mr K., leaves him space and a way out, and keeps her own escape route free. Mr K. no longer feels threatened and gradually calms down.
Calm words, tense body. Another day, Mr K. is agitated again. A staff member says “Calm down, everything is fine”, but she stands in the doorway with her arms crossed, keeps looking at the clock, and her voice sounds sharp. Mr K. hears the words but sees a blocked exit and impatience. He tries to push past her to the door, and she is pushed against the door frame.
How to classify it: The words were calming, the body language was not – and the nonverbal message won. Standing in the doorway blocked Mr K.’s way out and at the same time cut off her own escape route. Better: step out of the doorway while keeping her own exit in reach, uncross the arms, speak more slowly and leave Mr K. room. The incident should be documented and discussed in the team.
| Aspect | Case study: experienced colleague | Version B: incongruent |
|---|---|---|
| Distance | rather larger, no crowding | blocks the doorway |
| Posture and hands | open, hands visible, slow movements | arms crossed, looks at the clock |
| Tone of voice | calm and understanding | sharp, impatient |
| Way out | free for Mr K. and for her | blocked for both |
| Outcome | Mr K. gradually calms down | pushing, risk of injury |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: In tense situations, do you pay attention to your body language – calm, open, not threatening? Do you keep an appropriate distance and avoid crowding? Do your words, tone of voice and body language fit together? Is your inner calm the basis?
Show suggested approach
Observe yourself in your next shift, or ask a trusted colleague to give you feedback. Check four points: 1. Posture – open or closed (crossed arms, hands in pockets)? 2. Distance – do you step closer when someone is upset? 3. Position in the room – where are the door and your own way out? 4. Tone of voice – does it match your words?
Choose one point to work on deliberately, for example: “When someone is agitated, I first take a step back and make sure that both of us have a free way out.” You can also practise posture and distance in pairs during a team meeting.
- Body language often has a stronger effect than words: a calm, open, non-threatening presence de-escalates.
- Give space: keep an appropriate distance, do not crowd or corner the person, and leave a way out for both of you.
- Avoid threat: no towering, pointing, fists, staring or show of force – ideally one person leads the conversation.
- Words, tone of voice and body language must send the same message; inner calm is the basis.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. What does your body usually do when you feel under pressure?
Show prompt
2. In which rooms of your workplace could a person feel cornered – or could you?
Show prompt
3. When did your words and your body language last tell different stories?
Show prompt
References for this module
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN). (2026). S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen [S3 guideline: Avoiding coercion – prevention and treatment of aggressive behaviour in adults] (Version 3.0, AWMF register no. 038-022). https://register.awmf.org/de/leitlinien/detail/038-022
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2015). Violence and aggression: Short-term management in mental health, health and community settings (NICE guideline NG10). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng10
8. Module 8 · Environment & Prevention
Prevention is better than de-escalation
The best way of dealing with challenging behaviour is prevention: heading it off so that escalation happens less often or not at all. This is usually easier, more dignified and safer than de-escalating afterwards. Prevention starts with the causes and triggers (Modules 2 and 3). First, recognise and meet needs – basic needs such as freedom from pain, going to the toilet, food, drink, warmth, movement, rest and attention, as well as individual needs – before unmet needs turn into challenging behaviour. Second, avoid triggers: know the general and individual triggers (Module 3) and avoid them or handle them differently, for example by announcing care, working calmly and gently and reducing sensory overload. Third, adapt the environment (see below).
Fourth, relationship and communication: a familiar, trusting relationship and respectful communication that announces what will happen help the person to feel safe, so fear, hurt and resistance arise less often. Fifth, structure and meaningful activity, especially in dementia: a clear daily routine and occupation against boredom and restlessness. Sixth, attentive observation: notice early warning signs and respond early (Module 4). Seventh, documentation and handover: record triggers and approaches that worked and pass them on in the team, so that everyone acts preventively (NICE, 2015). Prevention addresses the causes instead of dealing with the consequences.
Learning objectives of this module
- You understand prevention as the best approach (preventing instead of de-escalating).
- You meet needs and avoid triggers.
- You adapt the environment/milieu.
- You use relationship, structure, observation and documentation.
The milieu as a de-escalation factor
The environment, often called the milieu, is an important and frequently underestimated factor. It affects wellbeing and behaviour, especially in dementia: an unfavourable environment can trigger challenging behaviour, a favourable one can reduce it (BMG, 2007).
Unfavourable factors include sensory overload – noise, bustle, a television running, many people, glaring light – which overwhelms people with dementia in particular and can lead to restlessness, aggression or withdrawal; cramped, crowded spaces; time pressure in care routines, which transfers to residents; disorientation in a confusing environment, which creates fear; conflicts among residents; and a cold, uncomfortable atmosphere. Favourable factors include a calm, homely atmosphere; the right level of stimulation – neither overwhelming nor boring, with quiet areas and places to withdraw to; orientation and security; enough space; structure and meaningful activity; and a calm, unhurried mood among the staff themselves. In practice, care teams can limit noise and television, create quiet corners, support orientation, offer activities and avoid passing on their own stress (NICE, 2018).
Prevention
| Approach | In practice |
|---|---|
| Meeting needs | Pain!, toilet, hunger, rest, attention |
| Avoiding triggers | Announcing, gentle, avoiding individual triggers |
| Adapting the milieu | Reducing sensory overload, calm, orienting |
| Relationship/structure | Trust, communication, occupation |
Table: Approaches to prevention and how they look in practice. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Needs orientation as the best prevention
The most fundamental prevention is needs orientation: recognising and meeting a person’s needs before unmet needs lead to challenging behaviour. This follows from the basic understanding in Modules 1 and 2 – challenging behaviour is usually the expression of an unmet need or distress. Needs orientation covers three levels. Physical needs: above all freedom from pain (pain is a common cause, Module 2, so good pain management is important prevention), timely toilet visits, food and drink, warmth, movement, rest and sleep. Psychological needs: security instead of fear, control and self-determination instead of helplessness, respect instead of hurt, attention and relationship instead of loneliness, and demands that do not overwhelm. Meaning and participation: meaningful activity, structure and stimulation, especially in dementia.
Needs orientation means perceiving needs attentively – including those expressed only through behaviour (‘detective work’, Module 2) – with the help of the person’s biography and information from relatives. It also means meeting needs proactively: accompanying the person to the toilet in good time, treating pain, giving attention and offering activities. Preventing challenging behaviour therefore largely coincides with good, person-centred care.
The calm environment
In one living area, restlessness and aggressive situations increase, especially in the late afternoon in the loud, crowded common room with the television running and a lot of commotion. The team analyses the situation and identifies sensory overload as a factor. It adapts the milieu: less noise, with television and radio limited, quieter areas and places to withdraw to, a calmer atmosphere, more structure and meaningful activity. It also pays closer attention to needs such as going to the toilet, pain and rest. Restlessness and aggressive situations decrease markedly.
More control instead of a better milieu. The same living area, but this time the team reacts differently. The common room stays loud, and the television keeps running. Residents who become restless are taken to their rooms early, and the team asks the doctor for something to calm them. Over the following weeks some residents are drowsy during the day and unsteady on their feet; in the late afternoon the restlessness continues.
How to classify it: The causes – sensory overload and unmet needs – remained untouched. Sedating medication does not remove them and carries risks such as falls; for antipsychotics in dementia, guidelines advise use only when there is a risk of harm or severe distress (NICE, 2018). Keeping a person in their room against their will, or sedating them in order to restrict their movement, can be a measure that deprives them of liberty and needs consent or court approval (section 1831 BGB). The first step is always to look for causes and adapt the milieu.
| Aspect | Case study: adapting the milieu | Version B: more control |
|---|---|---|
| Analysis | sensory overload identified | no analysis |
| Action | less noise, quiet areas, activity | residents taken to their rooms, medication |
| Needs | toilet, pain and rest checked | not considered |
| Risks | few | drowsiness, falls, deprivation of liberty |
| Outcome | restlessness decreases markedly | restlessness continues |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: How do you prevent challenging behaviour – by meeting needs, avoiding triggers, adapting the milieu, and building relationship and structure? Do you perceive needs attentively and meet them early? Is the environment in your area calming and easy to find one’s way in, or does it cause sensory overload?
Show suggested approach
Take a short walk through your living area at the time of day when restlessness is greatest and note: 1. What do you hear and see (noise, television, light, number of people)? 2. Are there quiet places to withdraw to, and is it easy to find one’s way? 3. Which needs are typically unmet at that time (toilet, drink, pain, rest, activity)?
Choose one change that the team can try for two weeks – for example switching off the television in the late afternoon, offering a regular drink round or setting up a quiet corner. Agree in the team who observes what, document the effect and discuss it at the next team meeting.
- Prevention is usually easier, more dignified and safer than de-escalating afterwards.
- The basis is needs orientation: meet physical, psychological and social needs before they turn into distress.
- The milieu matters: reduce sensory overload, time pressure and disorientation; create calm, orientation and activity.
- Relationship, structure, early observation and good documentation make prevention a team task.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. At which time of day or in which situation does challenging behaviour occur most often in your area?
Show prompt
2. Which unmet need do you think is most often overlooked in your work?
Show prompt
3. How does the team share knowledge about triggers and approaches that work?
Show prompt
References for this module
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [Federal Ministry of Health] (Ed.). (2007). Rahmenempfehlungen zum Umgang mit herausforderndem Verhalten bei Menschen mit Demenz in der stationären Altenhilfe [Framework recommendations on dealing with challenging behaviour in people with dementia in residential care]. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/Bericht_Rahmenempfehlungen_zum_Umgang_mit_herausforderndem_Verhalten_bei_Menschen_mit_Demenz_in_der_stationaeren_Altenhilfe.pdf
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) [German Civil Code], section 1831 Freiheitsentziehende Unterbringung und freiheitsentziehende Maßnahmen [deprivation of liberty through placement and freedom-restricting measures], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__1831.html
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2015). Violence and aggression: Short-term management in mental health, health and community settings (NICE guideline NG10). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng10
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2018). Dementia: Assessment, management and support for people living with dementia and their carers (NICE guideline NG97). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng97
9. Module 9 · Self-protection & Safety
Protecting yourself
When there is physical threat or violence, your own safety and that of others comes first. Self-protection is a legitimate part of dealing with challenging behaviour: nobody has to put themselves in danger or accept violence. Its principles are: keep your distance – it gives you time to react and also calms the situation (Module 7); keep your escape route free – do not let yourself be cornered, and position yourself so that the door is behind you, not behind the person; watch for dangerous objects that could be used as a weapon or thrown, and keep them out of reach; get help in good time – colleagues and, if necessary, the emergency services; and avoid unnecessary risks – caution, not heroism.
In an acute physical attack, get distance, protect yourself, get to safety and call for help – in Germany the emergency number is 112, the police can be reached on 110. Protect others at risk, such as fellow residents, too. Nobody has to endure an attack. Self-protection does not contradict de-escalation, it complements it (Module 5): you de-escalate calmly and keep your safety in view at the same time; in serious danger, safety comes first. Prevention (Modules 3 and 8), the team (Module 12) and aftercare (Module 10) are also part of it.
Legal position: anyone who wards off a present, unlawful attack on themselves or others acts in self-defence or in defence of others (section 32 StGB, German Criminal Code). The defence must be necessary, i.e. the mildest effective means: moving away, keeping distance, getting help, briefly fending off or releasing a grip. If the person is not acting culpably because of their illness (e.g. in dementia or delirium), moving away takes priority over fighting back. Holding, restraining or locking someone in over a longer period or regularly is a freedom-restricting measure. It needs the consent of the person if they are able to consent. Otherwise their legal guardian (Betreuer) or an authorised representative with a written power of attorney that expressly covers such measures must consent, and the custodianship court must approve it (section 1831(4) and (5) BGB, German Civil Code). In an acute emergency, a brief measure can be justified as necessity (section 34 StGB) if the danger cannot be averted otherwise. It must be proportionate and documented; a measure lasting more than about 30 minutes or repeated is no longer brief (DGUV, 2018).
Learning objectives of this module
- You understand self-protection as an important, legitimate part.
- You know the principles (distance, escape route, help, objects).
- You know that in the case of physical threat, safety takes priority.
- You combine de-escalation and self-protection.
No duty to endure violence
A sometimes misunderstood principle: nobody has a duty to endure violence or threats or to put themselves in danger. In the helping professions there is sometimes the idea that you must ‘put up with everything’ – out of a sense of duty, out of empathy for an ill person, or because ‘it comes with the job’. This idea is wrong and harmful. Violence against care workers is not part of the job, and nobody has to risk serious harm for the sake of care. Understanding that aggression is usually an expression of distress or illness (Module 5) does not mean having to endure it: you can understand the behaviour and protect yourself at the same time. In practice: in serious danger, put your own safety first; do not regard violence as normal; take your own strain seriously and get support (Module 10). Violence at work is also an occupational safety issue: the employer must assess the risks, including psychological strain, and take protective measures such as prevention concepts, training, support and aftercare (sections 3 and 5 ArbSchG; DGUV, 2018). This needs an open culture in which violence is not hushed up but reported, followed up and prevented.
Self-protection
| Principle | In practice |
|---|---|
| Distance | Room to react, protection (also de-escalating) |
| Escape route | Keep free, do not let yourself be boxed in |
| Help | Reinforcement/emergency call in good time – not alone |
| In the case of violence | Safety takes priority – protect yourself, do not endure |
Table: Principles of self-protection at a glance. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
De-escalation and safety working together
De-escalation and self-protection are sometimes seen as opposites – one close and empathetic, the other distant and protective. In fact they complement each other (cf. Module 5). First, many measures serve both aims: appropriate distance means the person does not feel crowded and you have room to react; a calm, non-threatening presence avoids fuelling the situation; leaving the person space and a way out de-escalates – and not boxing yourself in protects you. Second, the priority depends on the situation. In the early phase – tension and agitation without acute physical threat – de-escalation comes first (Modules 5–7), with distance and escape route in mind. In acute physical threat, safety comes first: you do not de-escalate ‘at any price’. Third, safety is the basis for calm: if you know that distance, an escape route and help are available, you stay calmer and de-escalate better; fear for your own safety blocks calm. Good practice therefore means de-escalating and protecting yourself – the person is protected by de-escalation, you and others by safety.
Safety first
A resident suddenly reaches for an object and becomes physically threatening towards a care worker. She first tries to de-escalate, speaking calmly and keeping her distance. When the threat becomes acute, she rightly puts safety first: she steps back, gets to safety through the free escape route and immediately calls colleagues for help instead of ‘holding out’. Together, the team then handles the situation safely, and afterwards it is followed up (Module 10). The case shows that in acute physical threat self-protection comes first – nobody has to endure violence.
Holding out alone. The same situation, but the care worker thinks she must cope on her own and must not leave the resident alone. She stays in the corner between the bed and the wall, tries to take the object away and grips the resident's wrist. The resident hits out harder; the care worker is injured on the hand, and the resident gets a bruise on the arm. Nobody has been called. Afterwards she says nothing because ‘it comes with the job’, and the incident is not documented.
How to classify it: Fending off an attack can be lawful self-defence, but only with the mildest effective means. Here, stepping back and calling for help would have been possible, and with a person who may not be acting culpably because of illness, moving away takes priority. Standing in the corner without an escape route and without help increased the danger for both. The injury is an occupational accident and has to be documented and reported according to the organisation's procedure; the care worker is entitled to support and aftercare (Module 10).
| Aspect | Case study: safety first | Version B: holding out alone |
|---|---|---|
| Position | escape route kept free | cornered between bed and wall |
| Acute threat | steps back, gets to safety | grabs the object and the wrist |
| Help | colleagues called at once | nobody called |
| Outcome | situation handled safely as a team | injuries on both sides |
| Afterwards | follow-up (Module 10) | kept quiet, not documented |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: Think of a critical situation at work. Did you pay attention to distance, escape route, help and dangerous objects? Do you know that in physical threat your safety comes first and you do not have to endure violence? How do you combine de-escalation and self-protection – and do you get help instead of staying alone?
Show suggested approach
Use four quick questions before and during a tense situation: 1. Distance – am I more than an arm's length away and outside the reach of kicks or blows? 2. Escape route – can I leave the room without passing the person? 3. Objects – is there anything nearby that could be thrown or used as a weapon? 4. Help – who knows where I am, and how do I call for support (alarm, phone, colleagues; in an emergency 112, police 110)?
If one answer is ‘no’, change it first: step back, reposition yourself, move objects out of reach or bring a colleague. If the threat becomes acute, leave and get help – that is not failure but professional practice. Find out which emergency procedure your organisation has and where alarm devices are.
- In acute physical threat, your own safety and that of others comes first – nobody has to endure violence.
- Distance, a free escape route, attention to objects and timely help are the core of self-protection.
- Self-defence must use the mildest effective means; with people who are ill, moving away comes first.
- Prolonged or regular restraint is a freedom-restricting measure: it needs the person's consent or that of their representative plus court approval.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. In which situations at work have you felt unsafe – and what made the difference?
Show prompt
2. Do you know what to do in your workplace if someone becomes physically threatening?
Show prompt
3. How do you feel about leaving a situation to protect yourself?
Show prompt
References for this module
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 3 Grundpflichten des Arbeitgebers [basic duties of the employer], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__3.html
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 5 Beurteilung der Arbeitsbedingungen [assessment of working conditions], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__5.html
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) [German Civil Code], section 1831 Freiheitsentziehende Unterbringung und freiheitsentziehende Maßnahmen [deprivation of liberty through placement and freedom-restricting measures], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__1831.html
Deutsche Gesetzliche Unfallversicherung (DGUV). (2018). Prävention von Gewalt und Aggression gegen Beschäftigte im Gesundheitsdienst und in der Wohlfahrtspflege: Eine Handlungshilfe für Arbeitgeber und Arbeitgeberinnen [Preventing violence and aggression against employees in health and social care: A guide for employers] (DGUV Information 207-025). https://publikationen.dguv.de/widgets/pdf/download/article/3429
Strafgesetzbuch (StGB) [German Criminal Code], section 32 Notwehr [self-defence], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__32.html
Strafgesetzbuch (StGB) [German Criminal Code], section 34 Rechtfertigender Notstand [necessity as justification], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__34.html
10. Module 10 · Aftercare & Follow-up
After the escalation
After an escalated situation, aftercare and follow-up matter – for the person concerned and especially for the care worker and the team. Follow-up has five parts: 1. Caring for the person, who may also be exhausted or upset: give safety, calm and attention, restore the relationship, and do not hold a grudge or punish. 2. Supporting the care workers involved, because aggression – verbal or physical – causes fear, hurt, stress and sometimes injury. 3. Documentation of the course, triggers, measures and any injuries – for traceability, learning and, where relevant, legal and occupational safety purposes. 4. Analysing the incident without blame: how did it come about, and what can we learn to prevent or de-escalate better next time? 5. A team debriefing for exchange, relief and learning.
The care worker's own follow-up is particularly important. Aggression and violence are stressful and must not be played down (‘it comes with the job’, ‘don't make a fuss’) or suppressed. What helps is exchange in the team, support from colleagues and management, acknowledgement of the strain and, especially after serious incidents, a debriefing or supervision. This protects against consequences such as anxiety, stress, trauma and burnout, and is part of the employer's duty of care (sections 3 and 5 ArbSchG). A violent incident at work that causes physical or psychological harm counts as an occupational accident. The employer must report it to the accident insurance if the employee is unable to work for more than three days; the statutory accident insurance recommends reporting violent incidents even without sick leave (section 193 SGB VII; DGUV, 2018).
Learning objectives of this module
- You know the importance and elements of aftercare/follow-up.
- You care for the person concerned and restore the relationship.
- You document, analyse (without blame) and learn.
- You take the care worker’s strain seriously and process it.
Taking the care worker’s strain seriously
Aggression and violence put more strain on care workers than is often admitted. Possible effects are fear – in the situation and afterwards, for example of it happening again; hurt from insults or attacks – verbal violence hurts too; stress and exhaustion; self-doubt and guilt (‘Did I react wrongly?’); physical injuries; and, after serious incidents, traumatic stress with fear, sleep problems or re-experiencing. These reactions are real, yet often played down – because ‘it is part of the job’, because violence against staff is normalised, or because people feel they have to be strong. Unprocessed strain can build up and lead to lasting anxiety, exhaustion, burnout, fear of going to work, withdrawal or even leaving the profession. What helps: talking in the team – the most important and most accessible support; acknowledgement by colleagues and management that the strain is real and that violence is not normal; support from management, such as relief, protective measures and follow-up; a structured debriefing after serious incidents; and, where needed, professional help such as supervision or psychological support. After an occupational accident, the statutory accident insurance institutions offer fast psychotherapeutic support (DGUV, 2018). The organisation must provide this framework as part of its duty of care (sections 3 and 5 ArbSchG). You yourself can take your strain seriously, seek exchange and accept help when you need it.
Aftercare & follow-up
| Element | In practice |
|---|---|
| Person concerned | Safety, calm, restoring the relationship |
| Care worker | Take strain seriously, exchange, support |
| Documentation/analysis | Document, analyse causes (without blame), learn |
| Team | Debriefing, where appropriate supervision/professional help |
Table: Elements of aftercare and follow-up. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Learning from incidents – without blame
After an escalation, it is worth analysing what happened – constructively and without blame. Three questions guide the analysis in the team: How and why did it come about? – needs, triggers, early warning signs and what happened before (Modules 2–4). How did we respond? – what calmed the situation and what made it worse? What can we learn? – how can we prevent it (meeting needs, avoiding triggers, adapting the environment – Module 8) and de-escalate earlier? Record the results, for example known triggers and helpful approaches (Module 3). The analysis is not about finding culprits – neither the care worker who ‘reacted wrongly’ nor the ‘bad’ resident. Blame leads to incidents being hidden, makes staff feel guilty and blocks learning. Self-critical reflection is welcome, but as a chance to learn, not as a reproach (Modules 3–4). This needs an open, fear-free safety culture. Together, aftercare for those involved and constructive learning make good follow-up: it relieves the people involved and improves practice for the future.
Supported and learned
A resident hits and insults a care worker; afterwards she is upset and unsettled. The team takes her strain seriously: colleagues listen and support her, nobody dismisses it as ‘part of the job’, and the manager holds a follow-up discussion. At the same time, the incident is analysed without blame: the triggers were pain and hurried, unannounced care. The team agrees to pay attention to pain in future, to announce each step and to work at a calm pace, and documents these findings. The care worker feels supported, and the team has learned something – a good example of aftercare and constructive learning.
Back to business. The same incident, but the shift simply carries on. A colleague says: ‘Don't make a fuss, it's part of the job.’ The manager is not informed, nothing is documented, and nobody asks how the care worker is. At handover, the resident is described as ‘aggressive’. A few days later the same situation occurs during hurried morning care. The care worker sleeps badly and dreads her shifts with this resident.
How to classify it: Playing the incident down leaves the care worker alone with her strain and prevents learning: the triggers (pain, hurried care) remain unknown, so the escalation repeats. Calling the resident ‘aggressive’ labels the person instead of explaining the behaviour. Violent incidents should be documented; if there is an injury, it counts as an occupational accident and is reported according to the organisation's procedure. The employer's duty of care includes aftercare for staff (sections 3 and 5 ArbSchG).
| Aspect | Case study: supported and learned | Version B: back to business |
|---|---|---|
| Care worker's strain | acknowledged, support offered | played down as ‘part of the job’ |
| Management | follow-up discussion | not informed |
| Documentation | triggers and findings recorded | nothing recorded |
| Learning | pain, announcing, calm pace | no analysis, label ‘aggressive’ |
| Outcome | care worker supported, team has learned | repeat incident, ongoing strain |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: Think of the last escalated situation you experienced. Was it followed up – care for the person, documentation, analysis, learning? Was your own strain, or that of a colleague, taken seriously? And was the incident discussed without blame?
Show suggested approach
Go through the five parts of follow-up for one incident: 1. Person – was the relationship restored? 2. Care worker – did someone ask how you or your colleague were, and was support offered? 3. Documentation – were course, triggers, measures and any injuries recorded? 4. Analysis – were the questions ‘How did it come about?’, ‘How did we respond?’ and ‘What do we learn?’ discussed without blame? 5. Team – was there a debriefing?
If something was missing, plan one concrete step, e.g. suggest a short debriefing after incidents, or ask your manager which aftercare procedure exists. If you notice lasting strain such as sleep problems or fear of going to work, speak to your manager, the company doctor or the accident insurance institution – getting help early is sensible.
- Good follow-up covers the person, the care worker, documentation, analysis and the team.
- The care worker's strain is real – it is taken seriously, not played down.
- Incidents are analysed without blame so that the team can learn and prevent repetition.
- Violence causing harm at work counts as an occupational accident; employers owe aftercare as part of their duty of care.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. How do you usually deal with strain after a difficult situation at work?
Show prompt
2. How does your team talk about incidents – looking for culprits or looking for causes?
Show prompt
3. What would you need from colleagues or management after a violent incident?
Show prompt
References for this module
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 3 Grundpflichten des Arbeitgebers [basic duties of the employer], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__3.html
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 5 Beurteilung der Arbeitsbedingungen [assessment of working conditions], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__5.html
Deutsche Gesetzliche Unfallversicherung (DGUV). (2018). Prävention von Gewalt und Aggression gegen Beschäftigte im Gesundheitsdienst und in der Wohlfahrtspflege: Eine Handlungshilfe für Arbeitgeber und Arbeitgeberinnen [Preventing violence and aggression against employees in health and social care: A guide for employers] (DGUV Information 207-025). https://publikationen.dguv.de/widgets/pdf/download/article/3429
Sozialgesetzbuch Siebtes Buch (SGB VII) [Social Code, Book VII – statutory accident insurance], section 8 Arbeitsunfall [occupational accident], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_7/__8.html
Sozialgesetzbuch Siebtes Buch (SGB VII) [Social Code, Book VII – statutory accident insurance], section 193 Pflicht zur Anzeige eines Versicherungsfalls durch die Unternehmer [employers' duty to report an insured event], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_7/__193.html
11. Module 11 · Special Situations
Special situations and groups
Some situations and groups need particular attention. In dementia, challenging behaviour usually expresses a need or distress that the person cannot communicate otherwise – pain, fear, being overwhelmed, too many stimuli, disorientation. Look for the cause, validate feelings instead of correcting or arguing (Module 6), give safety and familiarity, reduce stimuli, stay calm and avoid coercion. In delirium (acute confusion), think of a treatable physical cause – infection, dehydration, medication, pain – and have any sudden confusion or deterioration assessed by a doctor; accompany the person calmly and without confrontation. In a mental illness or crisis (e.g. psychosis, severe depression, suicidal thoughts, panic), stay calm, give safety, take the person seriously and do not confront; involve specialist help where appropriate (doctor, psychiatric service, crisis service). If there is an acute risk of suicide or another acute crisis, get help immediately.
With addiction or intoxication (alcohol, drugs, withdrawal), aggression is more likely and behaviour less predictable: pay particular attention to your own safety (Module 9), stay calm, do not provoke and get help where appropriate. With children and young people or people with an intellectual disability, adapt your approach to age and individual abilities. The basics stay the same: understand the cause (Module 2), act calmly and de-escalate (Modules 5–7), prevent (Module 8), protect your own safety (Module 9) and, in delirium, mental crisis, suicidality or addiction, involve medical or specialist help. Above all: if behaviour or confusion changes suddenly, always think of an acute, treatable cause.
Learning objectives of this module
- You know the approach in dementia, delirium, mental crisis, addiction.
- In the case of sudden confusion, you think of delirium (treatable!).
- In certain situations, you involve specialist help.
- You apply the basic principles adapted to the situation.
In the case of sudden change, think of delirium
A potentially life-saving rule: if behaviour or confusion changes suddenly, think of delirium. Delirium is an acute disturbance of attention and awareness, usually with a physical cause that can be treated – unlike dementia, which develops slowly. It often shows as challenging behaviour: sudden restlessness, aggression, disorientation or hallucinations. But it can also be quiet (hypoactive delirium): the person becomes withdrawn, slow and drowsy and eats less – this form is often missed (NICE, 2023). In people with dementia, delirium is easily mistaken for ‘the dementia getting worse’. Yet it needs prompt medical assessment, because the cause – e.g. a urinary or chest infection, dehydration, side effects of medication, pain or low blood sugar – has to be found and treated; untreated, delirium can become dangerous. The key warning sign is suddenness: changes within hours or days, especially in someone who was previously more stable. Further signs are fluctuating attention and alertness, new hallucinations or delusions, a disturbed sleep-wake rhythm and sudden disorientation. In practice: observe and document the change, ask about possible causes (infection? fluids? new medication? pain? blood sugar?) and inform the doctor – do not just calm or sedate the behaviour. Until the cause is treated, accompany the person with de-escalation: calm, reassurance, orientation, familiar people, no confrontation (NICE, 2023). Recognised and treated in time, delirium often resolves.
Special situations
| Situation | Particular feature |
|---|---|
| Dementia | Understand need/distress, validate, reduce stimuli |
| Delirium (sudden!) | Treatable cause → clarify (emergency!) |
| Mental crisis | Calm, take seriously, involve specialist help |
| Addiction/intoxication | Own safety, do not provoke, help |
Table: Special situations and their particular features. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
When to involve specialist help
Care staff do not have to cope with everything alone – and should not. In certain situations, medical or specialist help in good time is essential. 1. Suspected delirium or sudden deterioration: the doctor looks for and treats the cause; care observes, reports and accompanies. 2. Mental crisis or illness (psychosis, severe depression, acute anxiety or panic, suicidal thoughts): involve a doctor, psychiatrist or crisis service as needed. In acute suicidality or danger to self or others, get help immediately – doctor, crisis service or emergency number 112 – and do not leave the person alone. 3. Physical violence or danger: call colleagues and management, and the police (110) if there is serious danger (Module 9). 4. Situations beyond your competence – too complex, too dangerous or too stressful: getting help from colleagues, management, a doctor or specialist services is not failure but responsible, professional practice. Knowing when and which help to involve – and not hesitating too long – ensures the right treatment and safety and relieves the team. It links dealing with challenging behaviour with observing the person's condition, working with doctors and recognising your own limits.
The delirium recognised
Mr K. has dementia and is otherwise calm. Within a day he becomes very restless, aggressive and confused and has hallucinations. The team could treat this as ‘worsening behaviour’ and simply calm or sedate him. An attentive care worker recognises the sudden change as a possible delirium. She accompanies Mr K. calmly and reassuringly and informs the doctor so that the cause can be found. A urinary tract infection is diagnosed; after treatment, the delirium and the challenging behaviour resolve. Thinking of delirium and getting a medical assessment uncovered the treatable cause.
Calmed, not clarified. The same day, but the team concludes: ‘His dementia is getting worse.’ Mr K. is given a sedative as needed several times over the following days, and the bed rails are raised every night ‘so that he does not fall’. He becomes quieter, sleeps a lot and drinks little. Nobody connects this with the sudden change. Several days later he has a high temperature and is admitted to hospital with a urinary tract infection and dehydration.
How to classify it: Calming the behaviour without looking for the cause treated the symptom, not the illness. The quiet, drowsy state was not an improvement: it may still have been delirium (hypoactive form), and the infection progressed. Medication given mainly to keep someone calm or in bed and bed rails raised every night can restrict liberty; if this happens regularly or over a longer period, it needs the person's own consent or, if they cannot give it, the consent of their legal representative plus court approval (section 1831(4) BGB). A sudden change should always lead to a medical assessment.
| Aspect | Case study: delirium recognised | Version B: calmed, not clarified |
|---|---|---|
| Interpretation | sudden change → possible delirium | ‘the dementia is getting worse’ |
| First action | calm accompaniment, doctor informed | sedative as needed, bed rails at night |
| Cause | urinary tract infection found and treated | remains undiscovered for days |
| Outcome | delirium and behaviour resolve | hospital admission |
| Law and dignity | no freedom-restricting measure | regular restriction without legal basis |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: If a person's behaviour or confusion changes suddenly, do you think of delirium and have it assessed? Do you know how to approach people with dementia, a mental crisis or addiction? And do you know when to involve specialist help – delirium, suicidality, violence, being overwhelmed – and do you get it in good time?
Show suggested approach
For a sudden change, use three steps: 1. Notice – what is new compared with the last days (restlessness, confusion, hallucinations, or unusual drowsiness and withdrawal)? Since when? Does it fluctuate? 2. Check – signs of infection (temperature, urine, cough), fluid intake, new or changed medication, pain, blood sugar if diabetic. 3. Report – inform the doctor and the team with your observations and document them.
In a mental crisis with signs of acute suicidality, do not leave the person alone and get help immediately (doctor, crisis service or 112). Find out which psychiatric services and crisis services are available in your region and how to reach them.
- A sudden change in behaviour or confusion can be delirium – think of a treatable cause and inform the doctor.
- Delirium can also be quiet: withdrawal and drowsiness are warning signs too.
- The basics stay the same in every special situation: understand, de-escalate, prevent and stay safe.
- Involving specialist help in good time – e.g. in suicidality, danger or overload – is professional, not failure.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. Think of a person whose behaviour changed suddenly. Was a physical cause considered?
Show prompt
2. Which special situations make you feel least confident – dementia, delirium, mental crisis or intoxication?
Show prompt
3. When did you last get help in time – and when did you wait too long?
Show prompt
References for this module
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [Federal Ministry of Health] (Ed.). (2007). Rahmenempfehlungen zum Umgang mit herausforderndem Verhalten bei Menschen mit Demenz in der stationären Altenhilfe [Framework recommendations on dealing with challenging behaviour in people with dementia in residential care]. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/Bericht_Rahmenempfehlungen_zum_Umgang_mit_herausforderndem_Verhalten_bei_Menschen_mit_Demenz_in_der_stationaeren_Altenhilfe.pdf
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) [German Civil Code], section 1831 Freiheitsentziehende Unterbringung und freiheitsentziehende Maßnahmen [deprivation of liberty through placement and freedom-restricting measures], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__1831.html
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). (2023). Delirium: Prevention, diagnosis and management in hospital and long-term care (Clinical guideline CG103; first published 2010, last updated 2023). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg103
12. Module 12 · Self-reflection, Team & Summary
Reflecting and working together
Two aspects round off de-escalation competence. The first is self-reflection. How you handle challenging behaviour depends strongly on your own reactions, ‘sore spots’ and patterns – your behaviour shapes the dynamics of escalation, and your calm is decisive (Modules 4 and 5). Helpful questions are: How do I react in tense situations – calmly or irritably? What are my sore spots, i.e. what makes me react sensitively? How well do I stay calm? Do I take aggression personally? Reflecting alone, through feedback or in training and supervision helps you to develop your own competence deliberately.
The second is the team: dealing with challenging behaviour is a team task, and nobody has to cope alone. The team supports through mutual help in critical situations (Module 9), shared standards – an agreed approach, documented triggers and helpful responses (Module 3) – debriefing and learning from one another and sharing the strain (Module 10), and an open, supportive and learning team culture.
Learning objectives of this module
- You reflect on your own approach and develop it further.
- You know your ‘sore spots’ and your calm/reaction.
- You understand the approach as a team task.
- You bring the principles of de-escalation together.
Bringing it all together
In summary, dealing with challenging behaviour rests on these building blocks: the stance – understanding behaviour as an expression of distress instead of condemning it, de-escalation instead of coercion (Module 1); understanding – behaviour as communication, causes (above all pain) and triggers, including your own behaviour (Modules 2–3); the dynamics of escalation and early warning signs (Module 4); the de-escalating basic stance – calm, not taking it personally, empathy and safety (Module 5); verbal and nonverbal de-escalation – listening, acknowledging feelings, not arguing, calm body language, giving space (Modules 6–7); prevention through meeting needs, avoiding triggers and adapting the environment (Module 8); self-protection – no duty to endure violence (Module 9); aftercare and learning without blame (Module 10); special situations such as dementia, delirium, mental crisis and addiction (Module 11); and self-reflection and teamwork (Module 12).
The overarching message: understand challenging behaviour and de-escalate it – calmly, safely and with dignity. The key is the shift from condemnation to understanding, combined with a calm, empathetic stance, de-escalation techniques, prevention, self-protection, aftercare, reflection and teamwork. This approach addresses the cause, respects the person, avoids escalation and protects everyone involved – the person concerned, the care staff and others. Coercive measures remain a last resort that the law limits tightly (BMG, 2007; DGPPN, 2026), and sedating medication needs a medical indication – neither replaces the search for the cause. De-escalation is a learnable competence for safe, dignified care. We hope this course helps you to meet challenging behaviour with understanding, calm and dignity – for the people entrusted to you, for yourself and for everyone involved.
De-escalation at a glance
| Element | Core |
|---|---|
| Understanding | Behaviour = distress/need (do not condemn); pain! |
| De-escalating | Calm, acknowledge feelings, calm body language, space |
| Preventing | Meet needs, triggers/milieu |
| Securing & aftercare | Self-protection; strain/learning |
Table: De-escalation at a glance – summary of the course. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
De-escalation as a learnable competence and a team task
Two encouraging insights close the course. De-escalation can be learned. Understanding behaviour, staying calm, verbal and nonverbal de-escalation, prevention and self-protection are not a fixed talent. They grow through knowledge (like this course), reflection on your own reactions, practice – e.g. role plays and de-escalation training, offered by many organisations, for example through the accident insurance institutions or external providers – and experience. Training is particularly valuable because it practises the behaviour itself – calm reactions, body language – and builds confidence. Defence and release techniques in particular must be learned systematically and practised regularly (DGUV, 2018). Employers must instruct staff on safety and health at work, adapted to the risks and repeated where necessary (section 12 ArbSchG). De-escalation is a team task. The team provides reinforcement in dangerous situations (Module 9), shared concepts and knowledge (Modules 3 and 8), exchange and follow-up (Module 10), mutual relief and an open, non-blaming culture. Nobody has to be a ‘natural’ or manage alone – investing in your own competence and in a supportive team makes the work safer, more effective and more bearable for everyone.
Competent together
A team keeps facing challenging behaviour and feels unsure and burdened. It decides to tackle this together: everyone takes part in de-escalation training, which builds knowledge, technique and confidence. The team develops shared approaches and documents triggers and helpful responses, colleagues back each other up in critical situations, and incidents are followed up without blame. Over time, everyone handles situations more confidently and calmly, escalations become rarer and the strain more bearable. The case shows how learning and teamwork improve the approach.
Everyone on their own. The same team, but nothing changes. Each colleague deals with challenging behaviour in their own way: one argues, another avoids the resident, a third threatens consequences. There is no training and no shared approach; triggers and helpful responses are not passed on at handover. Incidents are only discussed briefly in the corridor. The residents experience contradictory reactions, escalations become more frequent, and one colleague goes on sick leave because of the strain.
How to classify it: Without a shared approach, the people concerned meet different reactions every day, which makes them more insecure and makes escalation more likely. Without training and follow-up, nobody learns from incidents. Employers must assess the risks of violence and psychological strain and instruct staff (sections 5 and 12 ArbSchG); the team can contribute by agreeing on a common approach and supporting each other.
| Aspect | Case study: competent together | Version B: everyone on their own |
|---|---|---|
| Learning | de-escalation training for everyone | no training |
| Approach | shared, triggers documented | everyone does it differently |
| Critical situations | colleagues back each other up | each person alone |
| Incidents | followed up without blame | only corridor talk |
| Outcome | more confidence, fewer escalations | more escalations, sick leave |
Table: Comparison of the two versions of the case. Source: own illustration, AI-assisted.
Exercise: Look back on the course. How do you react in tense situations, and what are your sore spots? How would you like to develop your de-escalation competence – through training, reflection or practice? How do you use and strengthen support in your team? What would you like to do differently from now on?
Show suggested approach
Write down three short notes – only for yourself: 1. One strength you already bring to tense situations (e.g. a calm voice, patience, knowing the residents well). 2. One thing you want to develop (e.g. not taking insults personally, spotting early warning signs, stepping back in time). 3. One step for your team (e.g. suggesting a short debriefing after incidents, documenting triggers, asking for de-escalation training).
Choose a concrete situation in the next weeks in which you will try your step, and look back afterwards: what helped, what was difficult? There is no right or wrong – the aim is your own development.
- Self-reflection on your own reactions and sore spots is the basis for developing de-escalation competence.
- Challenging behaviour is a team task: mutual help, shared standards, debriefing and relief.
- The course in one sentence: understand the behaviour and de-escalate it – calmly, safely and with dignity.
- De-escalation can be learned through knowledge, reflection, practice and experience – nobody has to be a ‘natural’.
Self-reflection (voluntary)
Voluntary · not assessed – your thoughts are not saved or evaluated. Think about each question first, then open the prompt.
1. Which situation from the last weeks would you handle differently after this course?
Show prompt
2. What are your ‘sore spots’ – and how do you notice that you are reaching them?
Show prompt
3. What do you need from your team – and what can you offer your team?
Show prompt
4. Which idea from the course do you want to keep in mind most?
Show prompt
References for this module
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 5 Beurteilung der Arbeitsbedingungen [assessment of working conditions], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__5.html
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 12 Unterweisung [instruction of employees], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__12.html
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [Federal Ministry of Health] (Ed.). (2007). Rahmenempfehlungen zum Umgang mit herausforderndem Verhalten bei Menschen mit Demenz in der stationären Altenhilfe [Framework recommendations on dealing with challenging behaviour in people with dementia in residential care]. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/Bericht_Rahmenempfehlungen_zum_Umgang_mit_herausforderndem_Verhalten_bei_Menschen_mit_Demenz_in_der_stationaeren_Altenhilfe.pdf
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN). (2026). S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen [S3 guideline: Avoiding coercion – prevention and treatment of aggressive behaviour in adults] (Version 3.0, AWMF register no. 038-022). https://register.awmf.org/de/leitlinien/detail/038-022
Deutsche Gesetzliche Unfallversicherung (DGUV). (2018). Prävention von Gewalt und Aggression gegen Beschäftigte im Gesundheitsdienst und in der Wohlfahrtspflege: Eine Handlungshilfe für Arbeitgeber und Arbeitgeberinnen [Preventing violence and aggression against employees in health and social care: A guide for employers] (DGUV Information 207-025). https://publikationen.dguv.de/widgets/pdf/download/article/3429
13. Checklists & practical aids
Checklists for everyday practice
✔ Checklist: Understanding & preventing
- Behaviour understood as an expression of distress/need (not condemned)?
- Cause looked for (‘detective work’) – pain in particular considered?
- Needs met, triggers avoided, milieu adapted?
- Own way of acting reflected on as a possible trigger?
- Early warning signs recognised and responded to early?
✔ Checklist: De-escalating
- Stayed calm (did not take it personally)?
- Verbal: calm voice, listened, acknowledged feelings, did not argue?
- Nonverbal: calm, open, not threatening, gave space?
- Verbal and nonverbal congruent (inner calm)?
- No contradiction, no threat, no coercion?
✔ Checklist: Safety & aftercare
- Self-protection heeded (distance, escape route, help, objects)?
- In the case of physical threat: safety prioritised (stepped away, got help)?
- Person cared for afterwards, relationship restored?
- Own strain taken seriously, exchange/support?
- Documented, analysed, learned (without blame)?
✔ Checklist: Special situations
- In dementia: understand the need, validate, reduce stimuli?
- In sudden confusion: thought of delirium, medically clarified?
- In mental crisis/suicidality: specialist help involved?
- In violence/danger: help/reinforcement called?
- Own limits recognised, help called in good time?
✔ Reminder card
- Behaviour is communication – look for the cause (pain!).
- Stay calm – do not take aggression personally.
- Acknowledge feelings – do not argue/refute.
- Give space, do not threaten; de-escalate early.
- Protect your own safety – step away and get help; you do not have to endure violence.
- Sudden confusion? Think of delirium, have it clarified!
Conclusion
You have learned to understand and de-escalate challenging behaviour: to interpret it as an expression of needs/distress, to recognise the causes (above all pain!) and triggers, to understand the dynamics of escalation, to de-escalate verbally and nonverbally, to prevent, to protect your own safety, to follow up situations and to deal with special situations (dementia, delirium). The central message: understand and de-escalate challenging behaviour – calmly, with understanding, safely and with dignity (instead of coercion/violence). If you wish, now use the voluntary self-reflection.
14. References & legal framework
References & legal framework
Legal sources
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 3 Grundpflichten des Arbeitgebers [basic duties of the employer], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__3.html
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 5 Beurteilung der Arbeitsbedingungen [assessment of working conditions], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__5.html
Arbeitsschutzgesetz (ArbSchG) [Occupational Safety and Health Act], section 12 Unterweisung [instruction of employees], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbschg/__12.html
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) [German Civil Code], section 1831 Freiheitsentziehende Unterbringung und freiheitsentziehende Maßnahmen [deprivation of liberty through placement and freedom-restricting measures], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__1831.html
Sozialgesetzbuch Siebtes Buch (SGB VII) [Social Code, Book VII – statutory accident insurance], section 8 Arbeitsunfall [occupational accident], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_7/__8.html
Sozialgesetzbuch Siebtes Buch (SGB VII) [Social Code, Book VII – statutory accident insurance], section 193 Pflicht zur Anzeige eines Versicherungsfalls durch die Unternehmer [employers' duty to report an insured event], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_7/__193.html
Strafgesetzbuch (StGB) [German Criminal Code], section 32 Notwehr [self-defence], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__32.html
Strafgesetzbuch (StGB) [German Criminal Code], section 34 Rechtfertigender Notstand [necessity as justification], as in force in October 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__34.html
Guidelines and professional sources
Arbeitskreis Schmerz und Alter der Deutschen Schmerzgesellschaft [Working group on pain and old age of the German Pain Society]. (2013). Hinweise zur Verwendung von BESD (Beurteilung von Schmerzen bei Demenz) [Notes on using BESD (assessment of pain in dementia)]. https://www.schmerzgesellschaft.de/fileadmin/pdf/BESD_Kurzanleitung_130626.pdf
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [Federal Ministry of Health] (Ed.). (2007). Rahmenempfehlungen zum Umgang mit herausforderndem Verhalten bei Menschen mit Demenz in der stationären Altenhilfe [Framework recommendations on dealing with challenging behaviour in people with dementia in residential care]. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/Bericht_Rahmenempfehlungen_zum_Umgang_mit_herausforderndem_Verhalten_bei_Menschen_mit_Demenz_in_der_stationaeren_Altenhilfe.pdf
Deutsche Alzheimer Gesellschaft [German Alzheimer Society]. (2022). Informationsblatt 18: Schmerz erkennen und behandeln [Information sheet 18: Recognising and treating pain]. https://www.deutsche-alzheimer.de/fileadmin/alz/pdf/factsheets/infoblatt18_schmerz_erkennen_dalzg.pdf
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN). (2026). S3-Leitlinie Verhinderung von Zwang: Prävention und Therapie aggressiven Verhaltens bei Erwachsenen [S3 guideline: Avoiding coercion – prevention and treatment of aggressive behaviour in adults] (Version 3.0, AWMF register no. 038-022). https://register.awmf.org/de/leitlinien/detail/038-022
Deutsche Gesetzliche Unfallversicherung (DGUV) [German Social Accident Insurance]. (2018). Prävention von Gewalt und Aggression gegen Beschäftigte im Gesundheitsdienst und in der Wohlfahrtspflege: Eine Handlungshilfe für Arbeitgeber und Arbeitgeberinnen [Preventing violence and aggression against employees in health and social care: A guide for employers] (DGUV Information 207-025). https://publikationen.dguv.de/widgets/pdf/download/article/3429
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). (2023). Delirium: Prevention, diagnosis and management in hospital and long-term care (Clinical guideline CG103; first published 2010, last updated 2023). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg103
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2015). Violence and aggression: Short-term management in mental health, health and community settings (NICE guideline NG10). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng10
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2018). Dementia: Assessment, management and support for people living with dementia and their carers (NICE guideline NG97). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng97