For their own good? A historical examination of restraint use

Predictors of Physical Restraint Use in Hospitalized Veterans at End of Life: An Analysis of Data from the BEACON Trial

BACKGROUND

The use of physical restraints in dying patients may be a source of suffering and loss of dignity. Little is known about the prevalence or predictors for restraint use at end of life in the hospital setting.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to determine the prevalence and predictors of physical restraint use at the time of death in hospitalized adults.

METHODS

Secondary analysis was performed on data from the "Best Practices for End-of-Life Care for Our Nation's Veterans" (BEACON) trial conducted between 2005 and 2011. Medical record data were abstracted from six Veterans Administration Medical Centers (VAMCs). Data on processes of care in the last seven days of life were abstracted from the medical records of 5476 who died in the six VAMCs. We prospectively identified potential risk factors for restraint use at the time of death from among the variables measured in the parent trial, including location of death, medications administered, nasogastric tube, intravenous (IV) fluids, family presence, and receipt of a palliative care consultation.

RESULTS

Physical restraint use at time of death was documented in 890 decedents (16.3%). Restraint use varied by location of death, with patients in intensive settings being at higher risk. Restraint use was significantly more likely in patients with a nasogastric tube and those receiving IV fluids, benzodiazepines, or antipsychotics.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to document that one in six hospitalized veterans were restrained at the time of death and to identify predictors of restraint use. Further research is needed to identify intervention opportunities.

[Descriptive study of the attitudes of family caregivers to the use of physical restraints: preliminary results]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the attitudes of families caring for elderly dependents to the use of physical restraints and to identify the factors that could influence these attitudes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A descriptive, cross sectional study was carried out in a consecutive sample of the population, using a questionnaire investigating the various aspects that influence attitudes to restraints. Responses were obtained from 50 family caregivers, of which seven were discarded due to lack of knowledge about restraints (N=43). The characteristics of the sample, frequencies, the main trends and dispersion measures were analyzed.

RESULTS

Most of the family caregivers considered the use of restrains to be appropriate and 90.7% were willing to use them with a relative; 41.9% believed that their use was unavoidable and were unaware of alternatives, while 23.3% were unaware that physical restraints can cause physical and psychological problems. None of the family caregivers believed that this method of restraint was a form of abuse.

CONCLUSIONS

Relatives had a positive attitude to physical restraints and considered their use appropriate. This finding could be related to their limited knowledge of alternatives and of the complications that can be caused by restraints. Training programmes on alternatives to these devices should be instigated.