58 The guidelines were amended, but a comprehensive assessment of the legislation was not initiated by the Ministry, as we had recommended. During subsequent visits, we found that the extensive use of solitary confinement in prisons increasingly posed a risk of inhuman and degrading treatment. After repeatedly raising these issues with key health and justice authorities, the Ombudsman decided to raise the issue of solitary confinement and lack of human contact in Norwegian prisons in a separate Special Report to the Storting (see separate article in Chapter three). The Directorate of Correctional Service’s ­management stated in 2019 that measures to prevent solitary confinement would be one of its most important focus areas in the time ahead. Use of means of restraint The use of means of restraint, such as security cells and restraint beds, is among the most intrusive measures that can be implemented in prison. Security cells are a highly intrusive form of solitary confinement in a bare cell, and a restraint bed entails strapping an inmate to a bed. The measures are so serious that we always go through the prison’s practice for this in particular detail during our visits, both when inspecting the cells where such measures are carried out and when reviewing documentation such as administrative decisions and supervision logs. NORWEGIAN PARLIAMENTARY OMBUDSMAN National Preventive Mechanism ANNUAL REPORT 2019 We have repeatedly criticised a lack of ­documentation demonstrating that an ­administrative decision was strictly necessary, or whether there were grounds for upholding the measure. We have also criticised several prisons for conducting routine body searches before placing inmates in security cells, and pointed out that inmates have inadequate clothing during the stay and that there is a need for daily supervision by medical personnel. In March 2019, the Directorate of Correctional Service adopted revised guidelines for the Execution of Sentences Act's provisions on the use of means of restraint.34 In the guidelines, the directorate included important clarifications to strengthen legal safeguards in relation to the use of restraint measures. These are in line with our recommendations to the prisons in a number of areas. Among other things, it was clarified that when security cells or restraint beds were used, the administrative decision should always state which less intrusive measures had been tried or were considered insufficient. The guidelines set out requirements for the information to be included in supervisory logs and new guidelines on body searches, supervision and clothing for inmates in these situations. During several of our prison visits, we have identified conditions that constitute a risk to the inmates’ health and legal guarantees regarding means of restraint, and, in particular, security cells. 34 The Directorate of Correctional Service, Guidelines to the Execution of Sentences Act Section 38, revised 15 March 2019.