Long-term deprivation of liberty Register Book of disciplinary proceedings, Monteledo (Ourense) Medical assistance protocol in restraints Shortcomings in the application of restraining measures §75 AR 2015 Follow-up on confinement and separation §254 AR 2014 123. The doctor on the Montefiz (Ourense) facility had been working there for 6 months and, as regards the medical assistance protocol in restraints, he stated unawareness of “how often I have to go” and that the young offenders themselves “usually request medical assistance following a restraint”, as well as professional assistance. He was informed that a medical check-up is mandatory following a mechanical restraint and that the Court should be informed; he was also unaware of this, given that he merely entered this intervention into the medical records. 124. When examining disciplinary proceedings and other documentation, in relation to temporary isolation, we detected that on occasion it had been applied as a restraining measure, although the disciplinary records indicated that this situation had been defined and documented as an interim measure to separate a minor from the group, without taking into account that interim measures are agreed and applied further to and during the processing of disciplinary proceedings, but never to justify an earlier action. This shortcoming was discovered in El Madroño (Madrid), Maliaño (Cantabria), El Limonar (Seville), Monteledo and Montefiz (Ourense), which have accepted our Suggestions to change this pattern of conduct. 125. One of the NPM’s specific objectives when visiting young offender institutions is to supervise how retraining measures are applied and documented, to particularly include temporary isolation, as well as group separations. In San Francisco-La Biznaga (Málaga) the doctor stated that she does not visit the rooms of young offenders separated from the group, affirming that most of the times she is unaware of the situation, “if nothing is 85