Coding for Physical Restraint Status Among Hospitalized Patients: a 2019 National Inpatient Sample Analysis

Disparities and Outcomes of Physical Restraint Use in Hepatic Encephalopathy: A National Inpatient Assessment

BACKGROUND

Physical restraints may be utilized in patients with hepatic encephalopathy with the intention to ensure patient safety.

AIMS

Determine if racial and socioeconomic disparities exist in restraint use for patients with hepatic encephalopathy and determine clinical efficacy of restraints in hepatic encephalopathy.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional retrospective study of hospitalizations for hepatic encephalopathy from 2016 to 2021 using the National Inpatient Sample. Patient race and income were assessed for associations with restraint use and restraints themselves were then assessed for associations with clinical outcomes including mortality. Separate analyses were performed for hospitalizations with and without invasive cares defined as the presence of ICD-10 codes for mechanical ventilation, gastric tube placement and/or central venous catheter placement.

RESULTS

Restraint use was documented in 2.4% of 228,430 hospitalizations. In hospitalizations without defined invasive cares, restraint use was increased in Black patients compared to White patients (aOR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.24-1.98, p < 0.001) while lower income was not independently associated with restraint use (1st vs. 4th quartile national income aOR = 0.98, p = 0.895). In hospitalizations that did not involve other defined invasive cares, physical restraint use was associated with higher mortality (aOR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.20-2.43, p = 0.003), whereas in hospitalizations where invasive cares were employed, physical restraint use was associated with reduced mortality (aOR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.40-0.77, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Careful consideration of the necessity of restraints in hepatic encephalopathy hospitalizations without other invasive cares appears warranted as social disparities in restraint use and increased mortality were both found in this group.

Physical Restraint Use in Hospitalized Patients: A Study of Routinely Collected Health Records Data

BACKGROUND

The use of restraints in hospitalized patients is associated with physical and psychological adversity for patients and staff. The minimization of restraint use is a key goal in the hospital setting. Reaching this goal requires an accurate assessment of existing patterns of use across clinical settings.

OBJECTIVE

This study reports the rate of physical restraints among patients hospitalized within a multi-entity healthcare network along with stratification by care context, diagnostic, and demographic factors, and examines the sensitivity and specificity of ICD-10 code Z78.1 "physical restraint status" for defining physical restraints relative to electronic health record (EHR) documentation.

DESIGN

The EHR was used for a retrospective analysis of all adults hospitalized between 2017 and 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

Hospitalized adults.

MAIN MEASURES

Patient demographics, structured diagnostic information, care area, length of stay, and in-hospital mortality, Z78.1 coding for physical restraints, restraint documentation in orders and flowsheets.

KEY RESULTS

Among 742,607 hospitalizations, 6.3% (n=47,041) involved the use of physical restraint based on coding or EHR documentation. Treatment in the intensive care unit (ICU) included restraint in 39% of encounters whereas treatment outside the ICU included restraint use in 1.3% of encounters. Besides critical illness, demographic factors including increasing age (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.21 [1.19-1.23]), male gender (aOR=1.56, [1.52-1.60]), unknown race (aOR=1.27 [1.19-1.35]), and preferred language other than English (aOR=1.24, [1.18-1.29]) were associated with higher odds of restraint utilization. As compared to EHR orders or documentation of restraint, the ICD-10 code for physical restraint had a sensitivity of 1.5% and a specificity of 99.99%.

CONCLUSION

Among adults admitted to acute care hospitals, clinical, demographic, and operational factors were associated with increased odds of restraint, with care in the ICU associated with greatly increased odds of restraint. Research into restraint utilization using coded administrative claims data is likely limited by the sensitivity of physical restraint coding.

Pediatric Physical Restraint Coding in US Hospitals: A 2019 Kids Inpatient Database Study

BACKGROUND

Reduction of physical restraint utilization is a goal of high-quality hospital care, but there is little nationally-representative data about physical restraint utilization in hospitalized children in the United States. This study reports the rate of physical restraint coding among hospitalizations for patients aged 1 to 18 years old in the United States and explores associated demographic and diagnostic factors.

METHODS

The Kids' Inpatient Database, an all-payors database of community hospital discharges in the United States, was queried for hospitalizations with a diagnosis of physical restraint status in 2019. Logistic regression using patient sociodemographic characteristics was used to characterize factors associated with physical restraint coding.

RESULTS

A coded diagnosis of physical restraint status was present for 8893 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8227-9560) hospitalizations among individuals aged 1 to 18 years old, or 0.63% of hospitalizations. Diagnoses associated with physical restraint varied by age, with mental health diagnoses overall the most frequent in an adjusted model, male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.56; 95% CI: 1.47-1.65), Black race (aOR 1.43; 95% CI: 1.33-1.55), a primary mental health or substance diagnosis (aOR 7.13; 95% CI: 6.42-7.90), Medicare or Medicaid insurance (aOR 1.33; 95% CI: 1.24-1.43), and more severe illness (aOR 2.83; 95% CI: 2.73-2.94) were associated with higher odds of a hospitalization involving a physical restraint code.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical restraint coding varied by age, sex, race, region, and disease severity. These results highlight potential disparities in physical restraint utilization, which may have consequences for equity.

Physical Restraint Usage in Hospitals Across the United States: 2011-2019

Objective

To determine the change in rates of physical restraint (PR) use and associated outcomes among hospitalized adults.

Patients and Methods

Using national inpatient sample databases, we analyzed years 2011-2014 and 2016-2019 to determine trends of PR usage. We also compared the years 2011-2012 and 2018-2019 to investigate rates of PR use, in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and total hospital charges.

Results

There were 242,994,110 hospitalizations during the study period. 1,538,791 (0.63%) had coding to signify PRs, compared with 241,455,319 (99.3%), which did not. From 2011 to 2014, there was a significant increase in PR use (p-trend<.01) and a nonsignificant increase in PR rates from 2016-2019 (p-trend=.07). Over time, PR use increased (2011-2012: 0.52% vs 2018-2019: 0.73%; p<.01). Patients with PRs reported a higher adjusted odds for in-hospital mortality in 2011-2012 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.9; 95% CI, 3.7-4.2; p<.01) and 2018-2019 (aOR, 3.5; 95% CI, 3.4-3.7; p<.01). Length of stay was prolonged for patients with PRs in 2011-2012 (adjusted mean difference [aMD], 4.3 days; 95% CI, 4.1-4.5; p<.01) and even longer in 2018-2019 (aMD, 5.8 days; 95% CI, 5.6-6.0; p<.01). Total hospital charges were higher for patients with PRs in 2011-2012 (aMD, +$55,003; 95% CI, $49,309-$60,679; p<.01). Following adjustment for inflation, total charges remained higher for patients with PRs compared with those without PRs in 2018-2019 (aMD, +$70,018; 95% CI, $65,355-$74,680; p<.01).

Conclusion

Overall, PR rates did not decrease across the study period, suggesting that messaging and promulgating best practice guidelines have yet to translate into a substantive change in practice patterns.