A review of physical restraint minimization in the acute and residential care settings

Interventions for preventing and reducing the use of physical restraints for older people in all long-term care settings

BACKGROUND

Physical restraints (PR), such as bedrails and belts in chairs or beds, are commonly used for older people receiving long-term care, despite clear evidence for the lack of effectiveness and safety, and widespread recommendations that their use should be avoided. This systematic review of the efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent and reduce the use of physical restraints outside hospital settings, i.e. in care homes and the community, updates our previous review published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of interventions to prevent and reduce the use of physical restraints for older people who require long-term care (either at home or in residential care facilities) SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register, MEDLINE (Ovid Sp), Embase (Ovid SP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Web of Science Core Collection (ISI Web of Science), LILACS (BIREME), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization's meta-register, the International Clinical Trials Registry Portal, on 3 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that investigated the effects of interventions intended to prevent or reduce the use of physical restraints in older people who require long-term care. Studies conducted in residential care institutions or in the community, including patients' homes, were eligible for inclusion. We assigned all included interventions to categories based on their mechanisms and components.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the publications for inclusion, extracted study data, and assessed the risk of bias of all included studies. Primary outcomes were the number or proportion of people with at least one physical restraint, and serious adverse events related to PR use, such as death or serious injuries. We performed meta-analyses if necessary data were available. If meta-analyses were not feasible, we reported results narratively. We used GRADE methods to describe the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six new studies and included 11 studies with 19,003 participants in this review update. All studies were conducted in long-term residential care facilities. Ten studies were RCTs and one study a CCT. All studies included people with dementia. The mean age of the participants was approximately 85 years. Four studies investigated organisational interventions aiming to implement a least-restraint policy; six studies investigated simple educational interventions; and one study tested an intervention that provided staff with information about residents' fall risk. The control groups received usual care only in most studies although, in two studies, additional information materials about physical restraint reduction were provided. We judged the risk of selection bias to be high or unclear in eight studies. Risk of reporting bias was high in one study and unclear in eight studies. The organisational interventions intended to promote a least-restraint policy included a variety of components, such as education of staff, training of 'champions' of low-restraint practice, and components which aimed to facilitate a change in institutional policies and culture of care. We found moderate-certainty evidence that organisational interventions aimed at implementation of a least-restraint policy probably lead to a reduction in the number of residents with at least one use of PR (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94; 3849 participants, 4 studies) and a large reduction in the number of residents with at least one use of a belt for restraint (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.73; 2711 participants, 3 studies). No adverse events occurred in the one study which reported this outcome. There was evidence from one study that organisational interventions probably reduce the duration of physical restraint use. We found that the interventions may have little or no effect on the number of falls or fall-related injuries (low-certainty evidence) and probably have little or no effect on the number of prescribed psychotropic medications (moderate-certainty evidence). One study found that organisational interventions result in little or no difference in quality of life (high-certainty evidence) and another study found that they may make little or no difference to agitation (low-certainty evidence). The simple educational interventions were intended to increase knowledge and change staff attitudes towards PR. As well as providing education, some interventions included further components to support change, such as ward-based guidance. We found pronounced between-group baseline imbalances in PR prevalence in some of the studies, which might have occurred because of the small number of clusters in the intervention and control groups. One study did not assess bedrails, which is the most commonly used method of restraint in nursing homes. Regarding the number of residents with at least one restraint, the results were inconsistent. We found very-low certainty evidence and we are uncertain about the effects of simple educational interventions on the number of residents with PR. None of the studies assessed or reported any serious adverse events. We found moderate-certainty evidence that simple educational interventions probably result in little or no difference in restraint intensity and may have little or no effect on falls, fall-related injuries, or agitation (low-certainty evidence each). Based on very low-certainty evidence we are uncertain about the effects of simple educational interventions on the number of participants with a prescription of at least one psychotropic medication. One study investigated an intervention that provided information about residents' fall risk to the nursing staff. We found low-certainty evidence that providing information about residents' fall risk may result in little or no difference in the mean number of PR or the number of falls. The study did not assess overall adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Organisational interventions aimed to implement a least-restraint policy probably reduce the number of residents with at least one PR and probably largely reduce the number of residents with at least one belt. We are uncertain whether simple educational interventions reduce the use of physical restraints, and interventions providing information about residents' fall risk may result in little to no difference in the use of physical restraints. These results apply to long-term care institutions; we found no studies from community settings.

Physical Restraint and Associated Factors in Adult Patients in Intensive Care Units: A Cross-sectional Study in North of Iran

Background/aim

Patients in the intensive care units (ICUs) are at high risk of developing delirium and agitation. Physical restraint (PR) has increased to control these patients which accompanies by adverse consequences. The aim was to determine the PR use and associated factors in patients hospitalized at the ICUs in the North of Iran.

Materials and methods

In this cross-sectional study, a total of 272 patients in 3 ICUs of 5 Azar referral hospital affiliated to Golestan University of Medical Sciences (Gorgan, Iran) in 2018 were included. Confusion assessment method for the ICU (CAM-ICU), Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) were used to evaluate delirium, sedation level, disease severity, and level of consciousness, respectively. Analysis was done by STATA version 14.2 (StataCorp LP, College Station, Texas), univariate and multiple analyses.

Results

Data from 272 patients were analyzed (mean age of 45.8 ± 21.3 years). PR was used for 74.5% of patients. Restrained patients had more severe disease [mean of APACHE II score, 20.20 (7.5) vs 11.6 (7.1)], longer length of stay [mean of 10 (5.5) vs 5.5 (4.6) days], and lower level of consciousness [mean of GCS score, 8.7 (3.5) vs 13.5 (3.3)] than patients without it. CAM-ICU was positive in majority of patients (79.5 vs 10.4%) and agitation level of RASS score was higher in restrained patients (31.7 vs 3.0%). Associated factors in multiple analysis were use of sedative and psychoactive drugs [odds ratio (OR), 2.85; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-7.82], presence of delirium (OR, 15.13; 95% CI: 4.61-49.65), deep sedation (OR, 0.04; 95% CI: 0.00-0.45), and GCS score (OR, 0.69; 95% CI: 0.53-0.9).

Conclusion

This study revealed the high use of PR in the ICUs, and use of sedative and psychoactive drugs, presence of delirium, deep sedation, and GCS score were such associated factors.

How to cite this article

Nomali M, Ayati A, Yadegari M, Nomali M, Modanloo M. Physical Restraint and Associated Factors in Adult Patients in Intensive Care Units: A Cross-sectional Study in North of Iran. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(2):192-198.

Variation of the Occurrence of Physical Restraint Use in the Long-Term Care: A Scoping Review

Physical restraints in the long-term care setting are still commonly used in several countries with a prevalence ranging from 6% to 85%. Trying to have a broad and extensive overlook on the physical restraints use in long-term care is important to design interventions to prevent and/or reduce their use. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review was to analyze the range of occurrence of physical restraint in nursing homes, long-term care facilities, and psychogeriatric units. Pubmed, CINAHL, Ovid PsycINFO- databases were searched for studies with concepts about physical restraint use in the European long-term care setting published between 2009 and 2019, along with a hand search of the bibliographies of the included studies. Data on study design, data sources, clinical setting and sample characteristics were extracted. A total of 24 studies were included. The median occurrence of physical restraint in the European long-term care setting was still high (26.5%; IQR 16.5% to 38.5%) with a significant variability across the studies. The heterogeneity of data varied according to study design, data sources, clinical setting, physical restraint's definition, and patient characteristics, such as ADLs dependence, presence of dementia and psychoactive drugs prescription.

Nurses' Views on the Use of Physical Restraints in Intensive Care: A Qualitative Study

Despite the worldwide promotion of a “restraint-free” model of care due to the questionable ethical and legal issues and the many adverse physical and psychosocial effects of physical restraints, their use remains relatively high, especially in the intensive care setting. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to explore the experiences of nurses using physical restraints in the intensive care setting. Semi-structured interviews with 20 nurses working in intensive care units for at least three years, were conducted, recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Then, the transcripts were analyzed according to the qualitative descriptive approach by Sandelowsky and Barroso (2002). Six main themes emerged: (1) definition of restraint, (2) who decides to restrain? (3) reasons behind the restraint use, (4) physical restraint used as the last option (5) family involvement, (6) nurses’ feelings about restraint. Physical restraint evokes different thoughts and feelings. Nurses, which are the professionals most present at the patient’s bedside, have been shown to be the main decision-makers regarding the application of physical restraints. Nurses need to balance the ethical principle of beneficence through this practice, ensuring the safety of the patient, and the principle of autonomy of the person.

Prevalence and variability in use of physical and chemical restraints in residential aged care facilities: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Use of physical and chemical restraints are common in residential aged care facilities worldwide. Restraint use can pose harm to residents even causing deaths.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the prevalence and variability in physical and chemical restraint use, and examine factors that may contribute to this variability of prevalence rates.

METHODS

Six health science databases were searched from inception up to 21st January 2020. Quantitative studies investigating restraint use in residential aged care facilities that reported data from year 2000 onwards were included. Meta-analyses of binomial data using a random effect model were performed to pool proportions of physical or chemical restraints with 95% confidence intervals. Univariable meta-regression analyses were used to assess factors that may contribute to the variability in physical and chemical restraint prevalence. Multiple meta-regression analyses were performed where possible to construct models of factors contributing to these variations.

RESULTS

Eighty-five papers were included. The pooled proportion of physical and chemical restraint use in residential aged care facilities were 33% and 32% respectively. Bedrails (44%) and benzodiazepines (42%) were the most prevalent forms of physical and chemical restraint respectively. Studies from North America (lower prevalence) [coefficient (95% CI): -0.15 (-0.27, -0.03)], measurement approaches using direct observation (higher prevalence) [0.17 (0.02, 0.33)] and a combination of multiple measurement approaches (higher prevalence) [0.17 (0.05, 0.29)] explained 25.5% of variability in the prevalence of physical restraint. Multiple meta-regression analyses were not performed to identify factors that may explain the observed variability in chemical restraint prevalence due to the small number of studies with data available.

CONCLUSION

Variability in prevalence of physical restraint could be explained partly by different measurement approaches and geographical regions. Valid and reliable measurement approaches across different regions is required to understand cultural differences due to geographical region effects on the prevalence of physical restraint use.

Patient safety and bedrail use as a global phenomenon: A prevalence study

Background: Although bedrail use may increase the risk of accidents among patients, bedrails are still extensively used in healthcare facilities. Therefore, the field calls for a review of bedrail use in practice. Objective: This report examined the prevalence and implications of bedrail use in rehabilitation facilities in Hong Kong. The findings are compared with the current state of bedrail use worldwide. Design and methods: This work is a cross-sectional, observational study. A secondary analysis was conducted on the database of a prospective trial. Bilateral bedrail use was observed in two Hong Kong rehabilitation hospitals. Logistic regression was performed to examine the factors associated with bedrail use. Results: A total of 3,384 restraint observations were made. The bedrail rate was 31.34%, which revealed that bedrail use was the second most commonly used physical restraint. The fall history (OR: 2.84), cognitive impairment (OR: 0.91) and functional dependency (OR: 0.79) of patients were significant predictors of bedrail use, p < .05. Conclusion: This study examines bedrail prevalence through direct observation, which is the preferred method for examining bedrail use in practice. We found that actual bedrail use is higher than the numbers reported in previous studies in Hong Kong. In addition, our research reveals that bedrails are commonly used for vulnerable patients. This finding highlights the need to change nurses' beliefs on bedrail use through education. The management of these health facilities should also aim to create an institutional environment that promotes the reduction of bedrail use. Implementation strategies on restraint reduction should also fit the culture of the organisation and local nursing practices, as well as the staff's values. Impact Statement: This study provides preliminary information about the widespread use of bedrails in Hong Kong and other countries. The research also introduces effective ways to achieve the reduction of bedrail use.

Interventions to reduce physical restraints in general hospital settings: A scoping review of components and characteristics

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To describe the characteristics of interventions for reducing physical restraints in general hospital settings.

BACKGROUND

Physical restraints, such as bedrails and belts in beds and chairs, are commonly used in general hospital settings. However, there is no clear evidence on their effectiveness but some evidence on potential risks for harm.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic database search (MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library; March 2020) and snowballing techniques. We included both interventional studies and quality improvement projects conducted in general hospital settings and published in English or German language. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection and data extraction. The Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist was used.

RESULTS

We included 31 articles (published between 1989 and 2018), 15 quality improvement projects and 16 intervention studies. Only five studies used a controlled design. Most studies and quality improvement projects investigated multicomponent interventions including education (predominantly for nursing staff) and additional components (e.g. case conferences). Three studies examined simple educational programmes without additional components.

CONCLUSIONS

A large number of multicomponent interventions for preventing and reducing physical restraints in general hospital settings have been developed. The interventions differed widely regarding the components, contents and settings. Well-designed evaluation studies investigating the effects of such interventions are lacking.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Multicomponent educational interventions might be one approach to change clinical practice, but only insufficient information is available about potential effects of these approaches.

The Conditions for Ethical Application of Restraints

Despite the lack of evidence for the effectiveness of physical restraints, their use in patients is widespread. The best ethical justification for restraining patients is that it prevents them from harming themselves. We argue that even if the empirical evidence supported their effectiveness in achieving this aim, the use of restraints would nevertheless be unethical, so long as well-known exceptions to informed consent fail to apply. Specifically, we argue that ethically justifiable restraint use demands certain necessary and sufficient conditions. These conditions are that the physician obtained informed consent for their application, that their application be medically appropriate, and that restraints be the least liberty-restricting way of achieving the intended benefit. It is a further question whether their application is ever medically appropriate, given the dearth of evidence for their effectiveness.

The patient/significant other experience of physical restraint in acute care settings: a qualitative systematic review protocol

REVIEW QUESTION

The overarching question for this qualitative systematic review is: What meanings are attributed to the experience of physical restraint among adult patients or their significant others in acute care hospitals? Specifically the review will seek to answer two questions.

Informed decision-making with and for people with dementia: Developing and pilot testing an education program for legal representatives (PRODECIDE)

Background

People living with dementia are often appointed a legal representative, to support and protect their ethical and legal rights to informed healthcare decisions. However, legal representatives usually have no qualifications in healthcare.

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore decision-making processes with participation of legal representatives and, resulting from this, to develop and pilot test an education program for legal representatives in Germany.

Methods

We conducted interviews with legal representatives and senior citizens about decision-making processes in healthcare, with special focus on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, physical restraints, and prescription of antipsychotics for people with dementia. We generated a curriculum based on systematic literature searches and the results of these interviews. We tested the education program for comprehensibility, feasibility, usability, and acceptance.

Results

Personal interviews with voluntary ( n = 12) and professional ( n = 12) representatives, and senior citizens ( n = 14) were conducted. Preferences, attitudes, and wishes regarding percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, physical restraints, and antipsychotics, and the process of decision-making, were heterogeneous. A structural approach is lacking. The education program proxy-decison-making (PRODECIDE) comprises four modules: (A) decision-making processes and methods; (B–D) evidence-based knowledge about percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, physical restraints, and antipsychotics. We conducted eight trainings with 47 legal representatives. PRODECIDE was well accepted. Comprehensibility of contents and materials was rated high. The program seems feasible for implementation.

Conclusion

PRODECIDE seems suitable to improve the decision-making processes of legal representatives in Germany. Implementation will be appropriate if efficacy is proven; a randomized controlled trial is currently underway.

Restraint use among selected hospitalized elderly patients in Cairo, Egypt

Objective

This study’s primary objective was to investigate the prevalence of physical and chemical restraint use in selected elderly hospitalized patients.

Results

This study was conducted in April 2014 in four major acute care hospitals. Trained data collectors assessed the use of physical and chemical restraint among all admitted elderly patients. There were 287 elderly patients (median age 64 years, 46% women). 32 patients were restrained. The overall prevalence of restraints was 11.1%, with physical restraint use alone at 3.2% and chemical restraints use alone at 7.3%. Restraint use varied by hospital type, with the highest at the private hospital (22.9%) and the lowest at the two university hospitals (< 6%). In conclusion the prevalence of physical and chemical restraint use among admitted elderly patients in Egypt is comparable to that seen in developed countries. However, the use appears to vary widely by hospital type. The use of restraints in the elderly remains an important question considering the increasing number of elderly.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-017-2978-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Informed decision-making with and for people with dementia - efficacy of the PRODECIDE education program for legal representatives: protocol of a randomized controlled trial (PRODECIDE-RCT)

BACKGROUND

In Germany, the guardianship system provides adults who are no longer able to handle their own affairs a court-appointed legal representative, for support without restriction of legal capacity. Although these representatives only rarely are qualified in healthcare, they nevertheless play decisive roles in the decision-making processes for people with dementia. Previously, we developed an education program (PRODECIDE) to address this shortcoming and tested it for feasibility. Typical, autonomy-restricting decisions in the care of people with dementia-namely, using percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) or physical restrains (PR), or the prescription of antipsychotic drugs (AP)-were the subject areas trained. The training course aims to enhance the competency of legal representatives in informed decision-making. In this study, we will evaluate the efficacy of the PRODECIDE education program.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial with a six-month follow-up will be conducted to compare the PRODECIDE education program with standard care, enrolling legal representatives (N = 216). The education program lasts 10 h and comprises four modules: A, decision-making processes and methods; and B, C and D, evidence-based knowledge about PEG, PR and AP, respectively. The primary outcome measure is knowledge, which is operationalized as the understanding of decision-making processes in healthcare affairs and in setting realistic expectations about benefits and harms of PEG, PR and AP in people with dementia. Secondary outcomes are sufficient and sustainable knowledge and percentage of persons concerned affected by PEG, FEM or AP. A qualitative process evaluation will be performed. Additionally, to support implementation, a concept for translating the educational contents into e-learning modules will be developed.

DISCUSSION

The study results will show whether the efficacy of the education program could justify its implementation into the regular training curricula for legal representatives. Additionally, it will determine whether an e-learning course provides a valuable backup or even alternative learning strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TRN: ISRCTN17960111 , Date: 01/06/2017.

The Nature and Extent of Physical Restraint-Related Deaths in Nursing Homes: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the published research to examine the extent, nature, and risk factors of mortality due to physical restraint use.

METHOD

In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement, this review examined all peer-reviewed studies published in English describing mortality due to physical restraint in nursing home residents.

RESULTS

The combined searches yielded 2,016 records of which eight articles were eligible for inclusion. There were 174 deaths due to physical restraint in nursing home residents across the eight studies. Neck compression ( n = 8) was the most common mechanism of harm resulting in death due to mechanical asphyxia.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical restraint is associated with deaths in nursing home residents. Further research is needed to investigate alternative interventions to restraint use.

Psychiatric Nurses' Attitude and Practice toward Physical Restraint

AIM

This study was to assess psychiatric nurses' attitude and practice toward physical restraint among mentally ill patients.

METHODS

A descriptive research design was used to achieve the study objective. The present study was carried out in three specialized governmental mental hospitals and two psychiatric wards in general hospital. A convenient purposive sample of 96 nurses who were working in the previously mentioned setting was included. The tool used for data collection was the Self-Administered Structured Questionnaire; it included three parts: The first comprised items concerned with demographic characteristics of the nurses, the second comprised 10 item measuring nurses' attitudes toward physical restraint, and the third was used to assess nurses' practices regarding use of physical restraint.

RESULTS

There were insignificant differences between attitudes and practices in relation to nurses' sex, level of education, years of experience and work place. Moreover, a positive significant correlation was found between nurses' total attitude scores, and practices regarding use of physical restraint.

CONCLUSION

Psychiatric nurses have positive attitude and adequate practice toward using physical restraints as an alternative management for psychiatric patients. It is important for psychiatric nurses to acknowledge that physical restraints should be implemented as the last resort. The study recommended that it is important for psychiatric nurses to acknowledge that physical restraints should be implemented as the last resort.

Physical Restraints: Consensus of a Research Definition Using a Modified Delphi Technique

OBJECTIVES

To develop an internationally accepted research definition of physical restraint.

DESIGN

Comprehensive literature search followed by a web-based, three-round, modified Delphi technique comprising reviews and feedback.

SETTING

Clinical care settings.

PARTICIPANTS

An international group of 48 experts consisting of researchers and clinicians from 14 countries who have made sustained contribution to research and clinical application in the field of physical restraint in clinical care.

MEASUREMENTS

Data were collected using an online survey program and one in-person meeting. Results of the online survey and the in-person meeting were used for distribution in subsequent rounds until consensus on a definition was reached. Consensus was defined as 90% of the participating experts agreeing with the proposed definition of physical restraint.

RESULTS

Thirty-four different definitions were identified during the literature search and served as a starting point for the modified Delphi technique. After three rounds, 45 (95.7%) of 47 remaining experts agreed with the newly proposed definition: "Physical restraint is defined as any action or procedure that prevents a person's free body movement to a position of choice and/or normal access to his/her body by the use of any method, attached or adjacent to a person's body that he/she cannot control or remove easily."

CONCLUSION

A multidisciplinary, internationally representative panel of experts reached consensus on a research definition for physical restraints in older persons. This is a necessary step toward improved comparisons of the prevalence of physical restraint use across studies and countries. This definition can further guide research interventions aimed at reducing use of physical restraints.

[Effects of a physical restraint removal program on older people with dementia in residential care]

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the results of removing physical restraints from elderly patients with dementia living in nursing homes. This objective is part of a wider process of change in residential care.

METHODS

Quasi-experimental study conducted in two residences from May 2010 to May 2012. Information was collected at 7 time points and longitudinal analyses were performed. After training staff, the physical restraints in El Puig centre were phased out, while in the Conarda centre, restraints were still applied to elderly people. The main variables studied were: falls, psychotropic medication prescriptions, different indicators of mental impairment, and degree of dependence (Norton, NPI, Mini-mental, Tinetti, Barthel).

RESULTS

In the El Puig centre all the physical restraints were removed. A slight improvement was seen in the number of falls, and their consequences. The ANOVA showed significant improvements in the centre that removed restraints in prescribing psychotropic medications, cognitive impairment, and behavioural changes.

DISCUSSION

It is shown that removing physical restraints do not cause negative effects as regards the number of falls, and also positively affects the welfare and independence of elderly people (through changes in behaviour and mental impairment). Furthermore, it is demonstrated that this program must be accompanied by the reduction and control of medicines (withdrawal of the number of psychotropic prescriptions).

Development methods of guidelines and documents with recommendations on physical restraint reduction in nursing homes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Physical restraint, e.g. bedrails or belts in beds or chairs, are commonly used in nursing homes. However, there have been reports of pronounced differences in the prevalence between different facilities. Guidelines or other documents with recommendations for clinical practice are one approach to overcome centre variation and improve the quality of care. Rigorous development methods are deemed to ensure the validity, clarity and clinical applicability of practice recommendations. This study aims at describing the development methods of documents offering recommendations on physical restraint reduction in geriatric long-term care.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search (February 2014) in electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Gerolit, Carelit), the World Wide Web (via google.de) and on the homepages of 34 international scientific or healthcare organisations, using various terms related to documents offering guidance for clinical practice and physical restraints. All German and English language documents with recommendations for clinical practice aimed at reducing physical restraints' in nursing homes were included. Documents targeting mental health or acute care settings were excluded. Two reviewers independently selected the documents and extracted data, using a self-developed and piloted data extraction form.

RESULTS

We identified 28 documents from Germany, USA, Australia, Switzerland, Canada and UK, published between 2002 and 2014. The documents were developed or published by governmental organisations, nursing or healthcare organisations, non-profit organisation, research institutions and private organisations. Two documents were developed mono-disciplinary (nursing) and eight documents interdisciplinary (including different healthcare professionals, lawyers or other stakeholders). In 18 documents the composition of the development group was not described. Two documents described the methods used for developing the recommendations. In both documents, the recommendations were based on a systematic literature search, critical appraisal of the evidence and developed in a consensus process. Materials or tools supporting the implementation were mentioned in 18 documents.

CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that most of the identified documents with recommendations to reduce physical restraints in nursing homes did not adhere to rigorous scientific development methods. Only two documents comprised a systematic literature search and critical appraisal. Guidance aimed to inform clinical practice should rely on transparent and evidence-based methodologically with sound developed recommendations.

Implementation of a Multicomponent intervention to Prevent Physical Restraints In Nursing home residenTs (IMPRINT): study protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Physical restraints such as bedrails and belts are regularly applied in German nursing homes despite clear evidence showing their lack of effectiveness and safety. In a cluster-randomised controlled trial, the efficacy and safety of a guideline-based multicomponent intervention programme has been proven. The present study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of two different versions of the original intervention in nursing home residents in four different regions throughout Germany.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study is a pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial comparing two intervention groups, i.e. (1) the updated original multicomponent intervention programme and (2) the concise version of the updated programme, with a control group receiving optimised usual care. The first intervention group receives an educational programme for all nurses, additional training and structured support for nominated key nurses, printed study material and other supportive material. In the second intervention group, nurses do not receive education as part of the intervention, but may be trained by nominated key nurses who have received a short train-the-trainer module. All other components are similar to the first intervention group. The control group receives the printed study material only. Overall, 120 nursing homes including approximately 10,800 residents will be recruited and randomly assigned to one of the three groups. The primary outcome is defined as the proportion of residents with at least one physical restraint after 12 months follow-up. The use of physical restraints will be assessed by direct observation. Secondary outcomes are the residents' quality of life and safety parameters, e.g. falls and fall-related fractures. In addition, comprehensive process and economic evaluations will be performed.

CONCLUSIONS

We expect a clinically relevant reduction in the proportion of residents with physical restraints. It is also expected that the process outcomes of this trial will enrich the knowledge about facilitators and barriers for the implementation of the multicomponent intervention programme.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02341898.

Clinical and organizational factors related to the reduction of mechanical restraint application in an acute ward: an 8-year retrospective analysis

Background:

The purpose of this study was to describe the frequency of mechanical restraint use in an acute psychiatric ward and to analyze which variables may have significantly influenced the use of this procedure. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted in the Servizio Psichiatrico di Diagnosi e Cura (SPDC) of Modena Centro. The following variables of our sample, represented by all restrained patients admitted from 1-1-2005 to 31-12-2012, were analyzed: age, gender, nationality, psychiatric diagnoses, organic comorbidity, state and duration of admission, motivation and duration of restraints, nursing shift and hospitalization day of restraint, number of patients admitted at the time of restraint and institutional changes during the observation period. The above variables were statistically compared with those of all other non-restrained patients admitted to our ward in the same period. Results: Mechanical restraints were primarily used as a safety procedure to manage aggressive behavior of male patients, during the first days of hospitalization and night shifts. Neurocognitive disorders, organic comorbidity, compulsory state and long duration of admission were statistically significantly related to the increase of restraint use (p<.001, multivariate logistic regression). Institutional changes, especially more restricted guidelines concerning restraint application, were statistically significantly related to restraint use reduction (p<.001, chi2 test, multivariate logistic regression). Conclusion: The data obtained highlight that mechanical restraint use was influenced not only by clinical factors, but mainly by staff and policy factors, which have permitted a gradual but significant reduction in the use of this procedure through a multidimensional approach.

Examination of ethical dilemmas experienced by adult intensive care unit nurses in physical restraint practices

Nurses are more likely to face the dilemma of whether to resort to physical restraints or not and have a hard time making that decision. This is a descriptive study. A total of 55 nurses participated in the research. For data collection, a question form developed by researchers to determine perceptions of ethical dilemmas by nurses in the application of physical restraint was used. A descriptive analysis was made by calculating the mean, standard deviation, and maximum and minimum values. The nurses expressed (36.4%) having difficulty in deciding to use physical restraint. Nurses reported that they experience ethical dilemmas mainly in relation to the ethic principles of nonmaleficence, beneficence, and convenience. We have concluded that majority of nurses working in critical care units apply physical restraint to patients, although they are facing ethical dilemmas concerning harm and benefit principles during the application.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Turkish intern nurses regarding physical restraints

OBJECTIVE

This study was carried out to determine knowledge, attitudes, and practices of intern nurses who completed the nursing internship program on the use of physical restraints.

DESIGN

This research was conducted using descriptive and cross-sectional research design.

METHODS

The study sample comprises 91 fourth-grade students who took an integrated curriculum and completed the nursing internship program. The data were collected with the Demographic Characteristics Questionnaire and the Levels of Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of Staff Regarding Physical Restraints Questionnaire. For the assessment of the data, percentages, the arithmetic mean, and t test were used.

RESULTS

The findings indicated that, of the intern nurses, 95.6% observed the use of physical restraints during their education, and 69.2% applied physical restraints. The mean knowledge, attitude, and practice scores of the nurses for physical restraint were 9.38 ± 1.19 (0-11 points), 34.70 ± 5.62 (12-48 points), and 37.95 ± 2.32 (14-42 points), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Intern nurses' knowledge about how to use physical restraints was at a very good level; they displayed positive attitudes, and they used their knowledge and attitudes in their practices to a great extent.

IMPLICATIONS

Although there are studies on the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of nurses working in the fields of elderly care, rehabilitation, and psychiatry in acute care units, there are no studies investigating intern nurses and other nursing students. However, intern nurses about to begin their careers should make accurate decisions regarding the use of physical restrains if they are to ensure patient safety and to fulfill this application effectively in their professional lives.

Predictors of physical restraint use in Canadian intensive care units

Introduction

Physical restraint (PR) use in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been associated with higher rates of self-extubation and prolonged ICU length of stay. Our objectives were to describe patterns and predictors of PR use.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study of analgosedation, antipsychotic, neuromuscular blocker, and PR practices in 51 Canadian ICUs. Data were collected prospectively for all mechanically ventilated adults admitted during a two-week period. We tested for patient, treatment, and hospital characteristics that were associated with PR use and number of days of use, using logistic and Poisson regression respectively.

Results

PR was used on 374 out of 711 (53%) patients, for a mean number of 4.1 (standard deviation (SD) 4.0) days. Treatment characteristics associated with PR were higher daily benzodiazepine dose (odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.11), higher daily opioid dose (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06), antipsychotic drugs (OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.74 to 5.48), agitation (Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS) >4) (OR 3.73, 95% CI 1.50 to 9.29), and sedation administration method (continuous and bolus versus bolus only) (OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.74 to 5.48). Hospital characteristics associated with PR indicated patients were less likely to be restrained in ICUs from university-affiliated hospitals (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.61). Mainly treatment characteristics were associated with more days of PR, including: higher daily benzodiazepine dose (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.07, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.13), daily sedation interruption (IRR 3.44, 95% CI 1.48 to 8.10), antipsychotic drugs (IRR 15.67, 95% CI 6.62 to 37.12), SAS <3 (IRR 2.62, 95% CI 1.08 to 6.35), and any adverse event including accidental device removal (IRR 8.27, 95% CI 2.07 to 33.08). Patient characteristics (age, gender, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, admission category, prior substance abuse, prior psychotropic medication, pre-existing psychiatric condition or dementia) were not associated with PR use or number of days used.

Conclusions

PR was used in half of the patients in these 51 ICUs. Treatment characteristics predominantly predicted PR use, as opposed to patient or hospital/ICU characteristics. Use of sedative, analgesic, and antipsychotic drugs, agitation, heavy sedation, and occurrence of an adverse event predicted PR use or number of days used.

Restraint use in acute and extended mental health services for older persons

Restraint of older persons in inpatient and residential care is used to control aggression, and prevent falls and other adverse outcomes. Initiatives to reduce these practices are being implemented worldwide. However, there has been little examination of restraint practice in psychiatric services for older persons. This paper reports a retrospective comparative analysis of restraint use in three acute and two extended care psychiatric inpatient wards in Australia. The analysis involved examination of restraint incidents and comparison of restrained and non-restrained patients. There was significant variation in restraint use between wards. On one acute ward, 12.74% of patients were restrained, although restraint use declined during the data collection period. Patients with dementia were restrained at higher rates than patients with other diagnoses, and restrained patients stayed in hospital for a longer duration. Restraint occurred early in admission, and few differences emerged between those restrained once or multiple times. Mechanical restraint was more prevalent than physical restraint, with restraint predominantly used to manage aggression and falls. Findings provide new data on restraint in older persons' psychiatric services. Greater conceptual understandings of behaviours associated with dementia and the unique needs of patients with these disorders may assist in reducing restraint use in these settings.

Process evaluation of a multicomponent intervention program (EXBELT) to reduce belt restraints in nursing homes

OBJECTIVE

The current study describes the process evaluation of a multicomponent intervention program (Expelling Belts [EXBELT]) to reduce the use of belt restraints in psychogeriatric nursing homes. The aim was to assess the feasibility and ascertain suggestions for optimization of the EXBELT program.

DESIGN

A descriptive study comprising longitudinal elements.

SETTING

Fifteen psychogeriatric nursing home wards in 6 Dutch nursing homes.

PARTICIPANTS

The study population consisted of 4 different groups of participants who took part in the intervention arm of the quasi-experimental study examining the effectiveness of EXBELT: nursing home staff who attended the final session of the educational program; 2 nurse specialists who delivered the educational program and did the consultations; 4 groups of delegates representing the nursing home associations where the EXBELT program was implemented; and the relatives of those residents in the intervention group who were restrained with a belt at the start of the study.

MEASUREMENTS

Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected from the study population. Data were assessed by means of self-administered questionnaires, recording forms, group interviews, telephone interviews, and monthly meetings.

RESULTS

The EXBELT study was largely performed according to protocol and very well received by nursing home staff as well as resident's relatives. Suggestions to improve the EXBELT program include the addition of examples of how to communicate about the policy change, improving the reach of the intended target population, adding more case-based learning strategies, and embedding the available consultants more proactively.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of EXBELT was highly successful in the current research population and is likely to be feasible in psychogeriatric nursing homes in general.

Application of behavior-based ergonomics therapies to improve quality of life and reduce medication usage for Alzheimer's/dementia residents

Behavior-based ergonomics therapy (BBET) has been proposed in the past as a viable individualized non-pharmacological intervention to manage challenging behaviors and promote engagement among long-term care residents diagnosed with Alzheimer's/dementia. We evaluate the effect of BBET on quality of life and behavioral medication usage in an 18-bed dementia care unit at a not-for-profit continuing care retirement community in West Central Ohio. Comparing a target cohort during the 6-month pre-implementation period with the 6-month post-implementation period, our study indicates that BBET appears to have a positive impact on the resident's quality of life and also appears to correlate with behavioral medical reduction. For instance, the number of days with behavioral episodes decreased by 53%, the total Minimum Data Set (MDS) mood counts decreased by 70%, and the total MDS behavior counts decreased by 65%. From a medication usage standpoint, the number of pro re nata (PRN) Ativan doses decreased by 57%.

Physical restraint in mechanically ventilated ICU patients: a survey of French practice

PURPOSE

To characterize the perceived utilization of physical restraint (PR) in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients and to identify clinical and structural factors influencing PR use.

METHODS

A questionnaire was personally handed to one intensivist in 130 ICUs in France then collected on-site 2 weeks later.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was returned by 121 ICUs (response rate, 93 %), 66 % of which were medical-surgical ICUs. Median patient-to-nurse ratio was 2.8 (2.5-3.0). In 82 % of ICUs, PR is used at least once during mechanical ventilation in more than 50 % of patients. In 65 % of ICUs, PR, when used, is applied for more than 50 % of mechanical ventilation duration. Physical restraint is often used during awakening from sedation and when agitation occurs and is less commonly used in patients receiving deep sedation or neuromuscular blockers or having severe tetraparesis. In 29 % of ICUs, PR is used in more than 50 % of awake, calm and co-operative patients. PR is started without written medical order in more than 50 % of patients in 68 % of ICUs, and removed without written medical order in more than 50 % of patients in 77 % of ICUs. Only 21 % of ICUs have a written local procedure for PR use.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey in a country with a relatively high patient-to-nurse ratio shows that PR is frequently used in patients receiving mechanical ventilation, with wide variations according to patient condition. The common absence of medical orders for starting or removing PR indicates that these decisions are mostly made by the nurses.

Physical restraint use in institutional care of old people in Sweden in 2000 and 2007

BACKGROUND

Physical restraint use is common in institutional care for old people and mainly used to prevent falls, despite the fall-preventive effect of physical restraints being questioned in previous research. The aim of the study was to investigate the use of physical restraints in Sweden in 2000 and 2007.

METHODS

Data were collected from two comparable census surveys conducted in all institutional care units for old people in 2000 (n = 3,669) and 2007 (n = 2,914). Information on residents' characteristics and physical restraint use was collected using the Multi-Dimensional Dementia Assessment Scale (MDDAS).

RESULTS

In 2000 16.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 14.8%-17.2%) of the residents were restrained compared to 18.2% (95% CI 16.8%-19.6%) in 2007 (p = 0.017). Adjusting for residents' characteristics showed that residents in 2007 were more likely to be physically restrained, relative to the residents in 2000 (odds ratio (OR) 1.031, 95% CI 1.005-1.058, p = 0.017). In 2007 the residents had been restrained longer, and a higher proportion were restrained for unknown reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical restraint use is still common. Moreover, the findings of this study suggest a small increase (OR 1.031) in the prevalence of physical restraint use from 2000 to 2007 adjusted for residents' characteristics.

Individualized behavior management program for Alzheimer's/dementia residents using behavior-based ergonomic therapies

Person-centered, nonpharmacological interventions for managing Alzheimer's/dementia-related behavioral disturbances have received significant attention. However, such interventions are quite often of a single type limiting their benefits. We develop a comprehensive nonpharmacological intervention, the Behavior-Based Ergonomic Therapy (BBET), which consists of multiple therapies. This low-cost, 24/7 program uses learning, personality, and behavioral profiles and cognitive function of each resident to develop a set of individualized therapies. These therapies are made available through an accessible resource library of music and video items, games and puzzles, and memory props to provide comfort or stimulation depending on an individual resident's assessment. The quantitative and qualitative benefits of the BBET were evaluated at the dementia care unit in a not-for-profit continuing care retirement community in west central Ohio. The 6-month pilot study reduced falls by 32.5% and markedly reduced agitation through increased resident engagement.

Physical restraints in an Italian psychiatric ward: clinical reasons and staff organization problems

PURPOSE

To analyze physical restraint use in an Italian acute psychiatric ward, where mechanical restraint by belt is highly discouraged but allowed.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected from medical and nursing charts, from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2008. Physical restraint rate and relationships between restraints and selected variables were statistically analyzed.

FINDINGS

Restraints were statistically significantly more frequent in compulsory or voluntary admissions of patients with an altered state of consciousness, at night, to control aggressive behavior, and in patients with "Schizophrenia and other Psychotic Disorders" during the first 72 hr of hospitalization.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Analysis of clinical and organizational factors conditioning restraints may limit its use.

[Physical restraint use in critical care units. Perceptions of patients and their families]

INTRODUCTION

The use of physical restraints in Intensive Care Units (ICU) is common although little is known about patients' and relatives' perceptions of this use.

OBJECTIVES

1) To analyze the prevalence and use of physical restraints in a general adult ICU; 2) to know the perceptions of patients who experienced use of physical restraints and; 3) to know the perceptions of relatives of patients who used physical restraints.

METHODS

This descriptive study, which used both quantitative and qualitative methods, was carried out in an adult ICU. For the first objective, all the patients (101) who had used any kind of physical restraint were analysed. For the second and third objectives, 30 patients and 30 relatives were interviewed using the guidelines of Strumpf & Evans as modified by Hardin (1993). All interviews were recorded, fully transcribed and then submitted to a language content analysis using the method of Hsieh & Shannon.

RESULTS

The only physical restraint used was the wrist restraint with a prevalence of 43.47%. Seventy-two percent of patients wore the restraint ≤12h and 28%>12h. Analysis of the patient interviews revealed 4 main themes: acceptance of the restraint conditioned by beliefs and information provided; feelings and sensations caused by the use of the restraint; alternatives proposed and future repercussions. Three themes emerged from the interviews with relatives: impressions caused by the use of the restrictions; reasons for accepting or rejecting them; alternatives to the use of restraints.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients used physical restraints for a short period of time and only the wrist restraint was used. Patients using physical restraints and their relatives expressed a wide range of feelings and sensations, with no negative future repercussions. In general, they agreed with the use of restraints although more precise information would lead to greater acceptance.

Multidisciplinary treatments, patient characteristics, context of care, and adverse incidents in older, hospitalized adults

The purpose of this study was to examine factors that contribute to adverse incidents by creating a model that included patient characteristics, clinical conditions, nursing unit context of care variables, medical treatments, pharmaceutical treatments, and nursing treatments. Data were abstracted from electronic, administrative, and clinical data repositories. The sample included older adults hospitalized during a four-year period at one, academic medical facility in the Midwestern United States who were at risk for falling. Relational databases were built and a multistep, statistical model building analytic process was used. Total registered nurse (RN) hours per patient day (HPPD) and HPPDs dropping below the nursing unit average were significant explanatory variables for experiencing an adverse incident. The number of medical and pharmaceutical treatments that a patient received during hospitalization as well as many specific nursing treatments (e.g., restraint use, neurological monitoring) were also contributors to experiencing an adverse incident.

Deaths due to physical restraint

BACKGROUND

Physical restraint is used primarily for patients at risk of falling, those with motor unrest and agitated behavior, and those who manifest an intention of doing harm to themselves or are at risk of suicide. The use of freedom-restraining measures (FRM), and, in particular, the use of physical restraints against the patient's will, can be a serious intrusion of basic human rights and, as such, an act of violence against the patient. The improper use of physical restraints can cause injuries of varying severity, which can sometimes be fatal.

METHODS

We analyzed all cases of death under physical restraint that were recorded in the autopsy reports of the Institute of Forensic Medicine in Munich from 1997 to 2010.

RESULTS

Among the 27 353 autopsies conducted over the period of the study, there were 26 cases of death while the individual was physically restrained. Three of these cases involved patients who died of natural causes while restrained, and one was a suicide. The remaining 22 deaths were caused solely by physical restraint; all of them occurred in patients under nursing care who were not continuously observed. The immediate cause of death was strangulation (11 cases), chest compression (8 cases), or dangling in the head-down position (3 cases). In 19 of these 22 patients, the restraints were incorrectly fastened, including two cases in which improvised non-standard restraints were used. One nursing-home patient died because of an abdominal restraint even though it had been correctly applied: She was mobile enough to slip through the restraint till it compressed her neck, and then unable to extricate herself from it, so that she died of strangulation.

CONCLUSION

To prevent such deaths, we recommend from a forensic medical standpoint that all possible alternatives to FRM should be used instead. If direct-contact restraints are truly necessary, they must be applied as recommended and the restrained person must be closely observed.

Interventions for preventing and reducing the use of physical restraints in long-term geriatric care

BACKGROUND

Physical restraints (PR) are commonly used in geriatric long-term care. Restraint-free care should be the aim of high quality nursing care.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to prevent and reduce the use of physical restraints in older people who require long-term nursing care (either in community nursing care or in residential care facilities).

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, a number of trial registers and grey literature sources were searched on 7 September 2009. The following search terms were used: "physical restraint*", bedrail*, bedchair*, "containment measure*, elderly, "old people", geriatric*, aged, "nursing home*", "care home*", "geriatric care", "residential facilit*".

SELECTION CRITERIA

Individual or cluster-randomised controlled trials comparing an intervention aimed at reducing the use of physical restraints with usual care in long-term geriatric care settings.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed the retrieved articles for relevance and methodological quality and extracted data. Critical appraisal of studies addressed risk of bias through selection bias, performance bias, attrition bias, and detection bias, as well as critera related to cluster designa. We contacted study authors for additional information where necessary. PR were defined heterogeneously throughout the studies. Not all studies offered sufficient data for aggregated data meta-analysis, and therefore study results are presented in a narrative form.

MAIN RESULTS

Five cluster-randomised controlled studies met the inclusion criteria. All of them investigated educational approaches. Two studies offered consultation in addition and two other studies offered guidance for nursing staff in addition. Four studies examined nursing home residents and one study residents in group dwelling units. No studies in community settings were included. Three studies included only one or two nursing homes per study condition. Overall, methodological quality of studies was low.The studies revealed inconsistent results. One study in the nursing home setting documented an increase of PR use in both groups after eight months, while the other three studies found reduced use of PR in the intervention groups after seven and 12 months of follow up respectively. The single study examining residents in group dwelling units found no change in PR use in the intervention group after six months whereas PR use increased significantly in the control group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence supporting the effectiveness of educational interventions targeting nursing staff for preventing or reducing the use of physical restraints in geriatric long-term care.

Preventing falls and fall-related injuries in hospitals

Falls are a widespread concern in hospitals settings, with whole hospital rates of between 3 and 5 falls per 1000 bed-days representing around a million inpatient falls occurring in the United States each year. Between 1% and 3% of falls in hospitals result in fracture, but even minor injuries can cause distress and delay rehabilitation. Risk factors most consistently found in the inpatient population include a history of falling, muscle weakness, agitation and confusion, urinary incontinence or frequency, sedative medication, and postural hypotension. Based on systematic reviews, recent research, and clinical and ethical considerations, the most appropriate approach to fall prevention in the hospital environment includes multifactorial interventions with multiprofessional input. There is also some evidence that delirium avoidance programs, reducing sedative and hypnotic medication, in-depth patient education, and sustained exercise programs may reduce falls as single interventions. There is no convincing evidence that hip protectors, movement alarms, or low-low beds reduce falls or injury in the hospital setting. International approaches to developing and maintaining a fall prevention program suggest that commitment of management and a range of clinical and support staff is crucial to success.

Fall Prevention Practices in Adult Medical-Surgical Nursing Units Described by Nurse Managers

The purpose of this article was to describe nursing practices (e.g., assessment, interventions) around fall prevention, as perceived by nurse managers in adult, medical-surgical nursing units. One hundred forty nurse managers from 51 hospitals from across the United States participated. Descriptive frequencies are used to describe nurse manager responses. The most commonly used fall risk assessment tool was the Morse Fall Risk Assessment Tool (40%). The most common fall prevention interventions included bed alarms (90%), rounds (70%), sitters (68%), and relocating the patient closer to the nurses’ station (56%). Twenty-nine percent of nurse managers identified physical restraints as an intervention to prevent falls whereas only 10% mentioned ambulation. No nurse manager identified that RN hours per patient-day were adjusted to prevent falls or fall-related injuries. More work is needed to build systems that ensure evidence-based nursing interventions are consistently applied in acute care.

Violence and restraint reduction efforts on inpatient psychiatric units

Efforts to reduce aggression and violence and the use of restraint and seclusion have traditionally been through some form of educational program. This paper presents an integrative review of research and quality improvement projects that aimed to reduce aggression/violence or restraint/seclusion through the use of an educational program. Forty-six papers are included in this review. This paper presents summaries and comparisons of the research designs, the content and length of programs, and the outcomes of these programs. From these summaries, trends in relation to design, content, and outcomes are identified, and recommendations for clinicians and researchers are given.

Nurses' physical restraint knowledge, attitudes, and practices: the effectiveness of an in-service education program

BACKGROUND

Physical restraints are commonly used to reduce treatment interference risk and protect patient safety. However, nurses still hold misconceptions about the use of physical restraints in acute care settings. Teaching nursing staff accurate knowledge and proper skills, cultivating positive attitudes, and rectifying irregularities in physical restraint use are all necessary to improve patient care.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a short-term in-service education program in improving nurses' knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported practices related to physical restraint use.

METHODS

Convenience sampling was used in this quasi-experimental study at two different branches of one hospital in southern Taiwan. The two branches were randomly assigned as either the intervention or control group. Fifty-nine nurses at one branch were assigned to the intervention group, and 70 nurses in the other branch were assigned to the control group. The developed 90-minute in-service education program was given to nurses in the intervention group. The questionnaire included demographic data and three scales (Knowledge of Physical Restraint Use, Attitudes of Physical Restraint Use, and Practice of Physical Restraint Use). These scales were used to measure critical study variables prior to and 2 weeks after the intervention.

RESULTS

Results found a significant improvement in the intervention group in terms of knowledge (p = .000), attitudes (p = .007), and self-reported practices (p = .048) related to physical restraint use after program completion. However, there were no significant differences in participant attitudes toward the use of physical restraints between intervention and control groups after program completion. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICES: Physical restraint knowledge and skills improved after the 90-minute in-service education program. Findings highlight the need to provide a short-term in-service education program on physical restraint use in acute care settings.

[What should be done and not done throughout the process of dementia? Dialogue and aid]

Because dementia is a powerful predictor of dependence, people with this disease are those that live longest with disability. Dementia is the chronic disease provoking the greatest dependence at 12, 24, and 36 months after diagnosis, ahead of other diseases such as stroke, Parkinson's disease and cardiovascular disease. Many of us are aware of the devastating consequences of dementia, but few know how to recognize the symptoms in the initial phases. To rectify this situation, increased public information and training for health professionals is required. To improve the care of the distinct phases of dementia, progress must be made in three areas: dementia must be considered a public health priority, the erroneous belief that nothing can be done for patients with a diagnosis of dementia must be combatted and, finally, no less importantly, knowledge of how to recognize incipient dementia must be acquired. People with dementia less frequently receive palliative care than patients with cancer, despite clearly sharing the need for care in the advances stages of the disease and frequent requests by relatives and carers. In summary, action can be taken to improve the early diagnosis of dementia and the care of the distinct phases of the disease, thus delaying and/or minimizing dependency. Finally, comfort measures at the end stage can be improved.