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

Outcomes among hospitalized patients with dementia and behavioral disturbances when physical restraints are introduced

BACKGROUND

Physical restraint use among patients hospitalized with dementia and behavioral disturbances has not been studied nationally in the United States.

METHODS

National Inpatient Sample database years 2016 through 2020 were used to compare physically restrained and unrestrained patients with dementia and behavioral disturbances. Multivariable regression analyses were used to assess patient outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 991,605 patients coded for dementia with behavioral disturbances. Among these, physical restraints were used with 64,390 (6.5%) and not with 927,215 (93.5%). Patients in the restrained group were younger (mean age ± standard error: 78.7 ± 0.25 vs. 79.9 ± 0.34 ; p < 0.01) and more often male (59.0% vs. 45.8%; p < 0.01) compared to the unrestrained group. A higher proportion of Black patients were in the restrained group (15.2% vs. 11.8%; p < 0.01). Larger hospitals also made up a more significant proportion of restrained versus unrestrained patients (53.3% vs. 45.1%; p < 0.01). Those with physical restraints had longer lengths of stays (adjusted mean difference [aMD] = 2.6 days CI [2.2-3.0]; p < 0.01) and higher total hospital charges (aMD = $13,150 CI [10,827-15,472]; p < 0.01). There were similar adjusted odds for in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.0 [CI 0.95-1.1]; p = 0.28) and lower odds of being discharged to home after hospitalization (aOR = 0.74 [0.70-0.79]; <0.01) for patients with physical restraints compared to those without.

CONCLUSION

Among patients hospitalized with dementia and behavioral disturbances, those with physical restraints had greater hospital resource utilization outcomes. Attempts to limit physical restraint use whenever possible may improve outcomes in this vulnerable population.

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.

Theories for interventions to reduce physical and verbal abuse: A mixed methods review of the health and social care literature to inform future maternity care

Despite global attention, physical and verbal abuse remains prevalent in maternity and newborn healthcare. We aimed to establish theoretical principles for interventions to reduce such abuse. We undertook a mixed methods systematic review of health and social care literature (MEDLINE, SocINDEX, Global Index Medicus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Sept 29th 2020 and March 22nd 2022: no date or language restrictions). Papers that included theory were analysed narratively. Those with suitable outcome measures were meta-analysed. We used convergence results synthesis to integrate findings. In September 2020, 193 papers were retained (17,628 hits). 154 provided theoretical explanations; 38 were controlled studies. The update generated 39 studies (2695 hits), plus five from reference lists (12 controlled studies). A wide range of explicit and implicit theories were proposed. Eleven non-maternity controlled studies could be meta-analysed, but only for physical restraint, showing little intervention effect. Most interventions were multi-component. Synthesis suggests that a combination of systems level and behavioural change models might be effective. The maternity intervention studies could all be mapped to this approach. Two particular adverse contexts emerged; social normalisation of violence across the socio-ecological system, especially for 'othered' groups; and the belief that mistreatment is necessary to minimise clinical harm. The ethos and therefore the expression of mistreatment at each level of the system is moderated by the individuals who enact the system, through what they feel they can control, what is socially normal, and what benefits them in that context. Interventions to reduce verbal and physical abuse in maternity care should be locally tailored, and informed by theories encompassing all socio-ecological levels, and the psychological and emotional responses of individuals working within them. Attention should be paid to social normalisation of violence against 'othered' groups, and to the belief that intrapartum maternal mistreatment can optimise safe outcomes.

The optimal intervention for preventing physical restraints among older adults living in the nursing home: A systematic review

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of restraint reduction programs for nursing home care providers in enforcing physical restraint on residents and identify the best strategies for such programs.

DESIGN

Systematic Review.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials published until February 2021 for systematic review. The systematic review captured multifactorial interventions, education and consultation measures, including nursing home residents' and care providers' results. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria.

RESULTS

In all seven trials, the interventions were led by a nurse specialist or unit leader and targeted at care providers. Five of the restraint reduction programs effectively reduced the rate of physical restraint use; two increased knowledge of restraint reduction for care providers; and one each promoted positive attitudes and behaviours. Duration of at least 6 weeks significantly improved the knowledge of care providers.

Effects and implementation of a minimized physical restraint program for older adults in nursing homes: A pilot study

Purpose

Physical restraint (PR) reduction interventions are currently exploring in developed regions with well-established welfare systems, whereas developing countries with fast population aging have not attracted enough attention. This China's pilot study evaluated the effects of a minimized PR program on restraint reduction and nursing assistants' knowledge, attitudes, intention, and practice toward PR and explored nursing assistants' experience of the program.

Patients and methods

This was a one-group, pretest, and posttest pilot trial with a nested qualitative descriptive study. A minimized PR program was obtained by summarizing the best evidence and was implemented in one Chinese nursing home with 102 older adults from December 18, 2020, to March 21, 2021. An educational program including three theoretical lectures and one operation training was first conducted for nursing assistants one-month period. The primary outcome was PR rate at 3 months. The secondary outcomes contained duration of restraints, types of restraints, the rate of correct PR use, the incidence of falls and/or fall-related injuries, and antipsychotics use at 3 months. Data on PR use and older adults' characteristics were collected through physical restraints observation forms and older adults' medical records. Nursing assistants' knowledge, attitude, intention, and practice toward PR were measured using the Staff Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Questionnaire regarding PR at 1 month. A semi-structured interview for two administrative staff and a focus group discussion with 13 nursing assistants were analyzed using content analysis to explore perspectives of intervention implementation at 3 months.

Results

There were a significant increase in knowledge, attitude, and practice and a decrease in intention of nursing assistants after 1-month educational intervention (P < 0.001). Furthermore, only the rate of correct PR increased and the duration of restraint in the daytime decreased significantly at 3 months (P < 0.05). There were no significant effects on PR rate and other secondary outcomes at follow-up. Qualitatively, nursing assistants demonstrated overtly supportive perspectives and that assistance from the program enhanced their knowledge and practice. They noted several challenges that impeded implementation.

Conclusion

The intervention has acknowledged some benefits and was valued by nursing assistants. Implementation barriers should be addressed before delivering in larger trials.

Interventions for preventing and reducing the use of physical restraints of older people in general hospital settings

BACKGROUND

Physical restraints, such as bedrails, belts in chairs or beds, and fixed tables, are commonly used for older people in general hospital settings. Reasons given for using physical restraints are to prevent falls and fall-related injuries, to control challenging behavior (such as agitation or wandering), and to ensure the delivery of medical treatments. Clear evidence of their effectiveness is lacking, and potential harms are recognised, including injuries associated with the use of physical restraints and a negative impact on people's well-being. There are widespread recommendations that their use should be reduced or eliminated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the best evidence for the effects and safety of interventions aimed at preventing and reducing the use of physical restraint of older people in general hospital settings. To describe the content, components and processes of these interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 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 (Clarivate), LILACS (BIREME), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization's meta-register the International Clinical Trials Registry Portal on 20 April 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials that investigated the effects of interventions that aimed to prevent or reduce the use of physical restraints in general hospital settings. Eligible settings were acute care and rehabilitation wards. We excluded emergency departments, intensive care and psychiatric units, as well as the use of restrictive measures for penal reasons (e.g. prisoners in general medical wards). We included studies with a mean age of study participants of at least 65 years. Control groups received usual care or active control interventions that were ineligible for inclusion as experimental interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the articles for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of all included studies. Data were unsuitable for meta-analysis, and we reported results narratively. We used GRADE methods to describe our certainty in the results.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies: two randomised controlled trials (one individually-randomised, parallel-group trial and one clustered, stepped-wedge trial) and two controlled clinical trials (both with a clustered design). One study was conducted in general medical wards in Canada and three studies were conducted in rehabilitation hospitals in Hong Kong. A total of 1709 participants were included in three studies; in the fourth study the number of participants was not reported. The mean age ranged from 67 years to 84 years. The duration of follow-up covered the period of patients' hospitalisation in one study (21 days average length of stay) and ranged from 4 to 11 months in the other studies. The definition of physical restraints differed slightly, and one study did not include bedrails. Three studies investigated organisational interventions aimed at implementing a least-restraint policy to reduce physical restraints. The theoretical approach of the interventions and the content of the educational components was comparable across studies. The fourth study investigated the use of pressure sensors for participants with an increased falls risk, which gave an alarm if the participant left the bed or chair. Control groups in all studies received usual care. Three studies were at high risk of selection bias and risk of detection bias was unclear in all studies. Because of very low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain about the effect of organisational interventions aimed at implementing a least-restraint policy on our primary efficacy outcome: the use of physical restraints in general hospital settings. One study found an increase in the number of participants with at least one physical restraint in the intervention and control groups, one study found a small reduction in both groups, and in the third study (the stepped-wedge study), the number of participants with at least one physical restraint decreased in all clusters after implementation of the intervention but no detailed information was reported. For the use of bed or chair pressure sensor alarms for people with an increased fall risk, we found moderate-certainty evidence of little to no effect of the intervention on the number of participants with at least one physical restraint compared with usual care. None of the studies systematically assessed adverse events related to use of physical restraint use, e.g. direct injuries, or reported such events. We are uncertain about the effect of organisational interventions aimed at implementing a least-restraint policy on the number of participants with at least one fall (very low-certainty evidence), and there was no evidence that organisational interventions or the use of bed or chair pressure sensor alarms for people with an increased fall risk reduce the number of falls (low-certainty evidence from one study each). None of the studies reported fall-related injuries. We found low-certainty evidence that organisational interventions may result in little to no difference in functioning (including mobility), and moderate-certainty evidence that the use of bed or chair pressure sensor alarms has little to no effect on mobility. We are uncertain about the effect of organisational interventions on the use of psychotropic medication; one study found no difference in the prescription of psychotropic medication. We are uncertain about the effect of organisational interventions on nurses' attitudes and knowledge about the use of physical restraints (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether organisational interventions aimed at implementing a least-restraint policy can reduce physical restraints in general hospital settings. The use of pressure sensor alarms in beds or chairs for people with an increased fall risk has probably little to no effect on the use of physical restraints. Because of the small number of studies and the study limitations, the results should be interpreted with caution. Further research on effective strategies to implement a least-restraint policy and to overcome barriers to physical restraint reduction in general hospital settings is needed.

Difference of Physical Restraint Knowledge, Attitudes and Practice Between Nurses and Nursing Assistants in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

The Use of Physical Restraints on Geriatric Patients: Culture and Attitudes among Healthcare Professionals at Intermediate Care Hospitals in Majorca. A Qualitative Study Protocol

The use of physical restraints is a common practice in the care of hospitalised and institutionalised elderly people. This use is determined by factors related to the patients, their families, the healthcare professionals, the institution, and prevailing social values. Today, however, this practice is often questioned because of its physical, psychological, moral, ethical, and legal repercussions. The present study explores attitudes among healthcare professionals towards the physical restraint of geriatric patients in intermediate care hospitals in Majorca. This study is based on a qualitative design, combining an ethnomethodological approach with critical discourse analysis. The theoretical framework is drawn from Foucault’s work in this field and from Haslam’s theory of mechanisation. Individual interviews will be conducted with physicians, nurses, and nursing assistants at intermediate care hospitals in Majorca. The analysis will focus on these professionals’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding the use of such measures, seeking to identify the factors, especially institutional factors, that determine the use of restraints. It is essential to determine the prevailing culture among healthcare professionals regarding the use of physical restraints on geriatric patients in order to design and propose a more dignified health care model in which such restraints are eliminated.

A cross-sectional study on nurses' attitudes towards physical restraints use in nursing homes in Portugal

Aim

To explore nurses' opinions regarding restraint measures and attitudes towards physical restraints use in nursing homes.

Design

Cross‐sectional study.

Methods

Nursing staff of 33 Portuguese nursing homes was asked to complete the Portuguese version of the Maastricht Attitude Questionnaire (MAQ), an instrument on attitudes regarding physical restraints (reasons, consequences and appropriateness of restraint use) and opinions about restraint measures (restrictiveness and discomfort). Descriptive statistics and bivariate analysis were performed.

Results

Data from 186 nurses were included in the analysis. Overall, nurses expressed neutral to moderately positive attitudes towards physical restraints usage. Nurses with longer professional experience reported a more positive attitude regarding the appropriateness of restraint use in their clinical practice. Wrist and ankle restraints were the measures that nurses reported feeling most uncomfortable using, and the most restrictive. Bilateral bedrails were globally assessed as a slightly restrictive measure and nurses reported not feeling uncomfortable using them.

Process evaluation of a multicomponent intervention to prevent physical restraints in nursing homes (IMPRINT): A mixed methods study

AIMS

To describe the implementation process and fidelity of two versions of a guideline-based, multicomponent intervention to reduce physical restraints in nursing homes and to identify factors that might explain the heterogeneity of effects between different clusters.

DESIGN

Mixed methods evaluation of the implementation process (dose delivered, dose received, response, and adaption) alongside a pragmatic three-arm cluster randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Quantitative and qualitative process data were collected during the study period (February 2015-February 2017). Quantitative data from questionnaires and short surveys were analysed by descriptive statistics. Qualitative data from focus groups and semi-structured interviews were analysed using content analysis. An in-depth analysis was conducted by contrasting responding and non-responding clusters regarding the intervention goal and primary outcome.

RESULTS

Both interventions were implemented as planned in all clusters: we found no deviations from the protocol regarding the dose delivered to and received by the clusters. Satisfaction of staff targeted by the interventions was high. The in-depth analysis did not reveal any pronounced variation in the degree of implementation or adoption in clusters with a good or nearly no response to the interventions or factors explaining different study effects.

CONCLUSION

Although both versions of a guideline-based multicomponent intervention to prevent physical restraints in nursing homes were implemented as planned and the response was generally acceptable, the interventions' goal to change nursing practice towards a least-restraint policy was not achieved by the entire nursing staff in all of the clusters. No factors could be identified that might explain the different effects of the interventions.

IMPACT

For some nursing homes, different approaches than addressing nurses' attitudes and institutional policies might be needed to sustainably reduce the use of physical restraints; however, the process evaluation did not reveal characteristics that might have hampered or facilitated the effectiveness of the intervention.

Nurse education to reduce physical restraints use in ICU: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Physical restraints are defined as a manual approach to reduce a patient's physical movement and has been regarded as a protective nursing measure in the intensive care unit (ICU) to avoid unplanned extubation, falls, and other unexpected events. However, the limitations and changes associated with physical restraints have been verified by several studies. Restraint minimization has been advocated by studies worldwide; however, the most effective interventions are still being explored.

AIM

To identify and map nurse education strategies that reduce the use of physical restraints in the ICU.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A systematic literature search that followed the steps of a scoping review was performed in the Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CNKI, Wan Fang Data, and VIP databases. We included studies that focused on nurse education aiming to reduce the use of physical restraints and/or use physical restraints reasonably.

RESULTS

The included studies (n = 12) described a variety of education strategies. Two delivery modes, eight common course durations, 14 main topics, two types of teaching methods with various materials, and two kinds of outcome measurements were identified and compared.

CONCLUSION

There are a variety of nurse education activities that could effectively improve ICU nurses' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours towards physical restraints. However, the strategies of nurse education, such as delivery mode, teaching methods, and outcome measurements, require further study.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Nurse education on physical restraints should be carried out in ICUs. Online courses, practical sessions, and simulated scenarios should be a part of future nurse education. In addition to nurses' knowledge and attitude changes, frequency of physical restraints and other patient-related outcomes should also be considered for outcome evaluation.

Restraint use in residents with dementia living in residential aged care facilities: A scoping review

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of restraint use in residents with dementia in the context of residential aged care facilities.

BACKGROUND

Restraints are commonly used in people with dementia living in residential aged care facilities to manage behaviours and reduce injuries, but the concept of restraint use in people with dementia remains ambiguous, and current practices to reduce restraint use in long-term care residents with dementia remain unclear.

DESIGN

A scoping review using the methodological frameworks of Arskey and O'Malley and colleagues.

METHODS

Nine databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, OVID, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ProQuest) were searched from 2005 to 20 May 2019. Articles were included if they were written in English, peer-reviewed and used any research method that described restraint use in residents with dementia living in residential care settings. The PRISMA-ScR checklist was used.

RESULTS

From 1,585 articles, 23 met the inclusion criteria. There is a lack of a clear definition of restraint use, and the prevalence of restraint use varied from 30.7% to 64.8% depending on the different operational concepts. People with dementia were at a higher risk for restraint use, and the decision-making process for restraint use was largely ignored in the literature. The effect of staff educational interventions to reduce restraint use was inconsistent due to varying delivery duration and content.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of restraint use in people with dementia living in residential care settings remains high alongside the absence of a clear definition of restraint use. More research about the decision-making process involved in using restraint and development of effective interventions are needed.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Better education about the decision-making regarding staff, conditions of residents and organisations for restraint use is needed to improve the care for people with dementia living in care settings.

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.

Reducing physical restraints by older adults in home care: development of an evidence-based guideline

Background

Restraint use is a complex and challenging issue in home care. Due to socio-demographic trends, worldwide home healthcare providers are faced with an increasing demand for restraint use from informal caregivers, patients and healthcare providers, resulting in the use of various types of restraints in home care. Awareness and knowledge of restraint use in home care, its implications and the ethical challenges surrounding it are of crucial importance to its reduction. This research aimed to describe the development process of an evidence-based practice guideline to support caregivers to optimize home care.

Method

The practice guideline was developed according to the framework of the Belgian Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and AGREE II. The guideline was developed over several stages: (1) determination of the target population and scope, (2) literature search, (3) drafting and (4) validation. A multidisciplinary working group determined the proposed purpose, target group, and six clinical questions for the guideline. A consensus procedure and consultation by experts were used to develop the guideline.

Results

The guideline provides an answer to six clinical questions and contains ten key recommendations based on the classification of GRADE, with the objective of increasing healthcare providers’ awareness, knowledge and competence to adequately deal with situations or questions related to restraint use. The guideline also includes a flowchart for dealing with complex situations where the use of restraints is requested, already present or considered.

Conclusions

The guideline was validated by the Belgian Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Increasing competence, awareness and knowledge related to restraint use are key objectives of the guideline for reducing restraint use in home care. A multicomponent intervention to support healthcare workers in implementing the guideline in clinical practice needs to be developed.

Improving practice and informing policy development: The impact of gerontological nursing research

Nurses have always approached the clinical care challenges they encounter with a combination of critical observation and a profound concern for human suffering. Beginning in earnest in the early 1980s, nurse researchers have pursued the answers to questions about the wellbeing of older adults, particularly those suffering from serious, chronic conditions. This paper offers three exemplars of nursing research domains that illustrate the creativity and commitment of nurse researchers seeking to understand and improve pervasive clinical problems experienced by older adults and to demonstrate the profound influence these activities have had on the evolution of the science and the quality of care for older adults. The impact of this work is reflected in practice protocols, institutional policies, government oversight, and improved outcomes for patients.

Physical restraining of nursing home residents in the last week of life: An epidemiological study in six European countries

BACKGROUND

End-of-life care in nursing homes holds several risk factors for the use of physical restraints on residents, a practice shown to be neither safe nor effective.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the frequency of physical limb and/or trunk restraint use in the last week of life of nursing home residents in six European countries and its association with country, resident and nursing home characteristics.

DESIGN

Epidemiological survey study.

SETTING

Proportionally stratified random sample of nursing homes in Belgium (BE), England (ENG), Finland (FI), Italy (IT), the Netherlands (NL), and Poland (PL).

PARTICIPANTS

Nursing home staff (nurses or care assistants).

METHODS

In all participating nursing homes, we identified all residents who died during the three months prior to measurements. The staff member most involved in each resident's care indicated in a structured questionnaire whether trunk and/or limb restraints were used on that resident during the last week of life 'daily', 'less frequently than daily' or 'not used'.

RESULTS

In 322 nursing homes, staff returned questionnaires regarding 1384 deceased residents (response rate 81%). Limb and/or trunk restraints were used "daily" in the last week of life in 8% (BE), 1% (ENG), 4% (FI), 12% (IT), 0% (NL), and 0.4% (PL) of residents; and "less frequently than daily" in 4% (BE), 0% (ENG), 0.4% (FI), 6% (IT), 0% (NL), and 3.5% (PL) of residents. Restraint use was associated with country (p = 0.020) and inversely associated with residents' age (p = 0.017; odds ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 0.99). Restraint use was not significantly associated with resident's gender, dementia, functional status, staffing level, or the level of dependency of residents within the nursing home.

CONCLUSIONS

In all but one of the six countries studied, staff reported that nursing home residents were restrained through limb and/or trunk restraints in the last week of life. The proportion of restrained residents was highest in Italy and Belgium. Organizational and resident characteristics may not be relevant predictors of restraint use at the end of life in this setting. National policy that explicitly discourages physical restraints in nursing home care and suggests alternative practices may be an important component of strategies to prevent their use.

Freiheitseinschränkung aus Sicht der Interessenvertretungen von Pflegeheimbewohnerinnen und -bewohnern − eine qualitative Studie

Zusammenfassung. Hintergrund: Freiheitseinschränkende Maßnahmen werden trotz fehlenden Belegs zum Nutzen und bekannter negativer Konsequenzen regelmäßig in Pflegeheimen eingesetzt. Neben Pflegenden können Angehörige, Betreuer / -innen, Vorsorgebevollmächtigte und Heimbeiräte als Interessenvertretungen der Bewohner / -innen den Einsatz der Maßnahmen beeinflussen. Ziel: Beschreibung der Sichtweise von Interessenvertretungen der Heimbewohner / -innen zur Anwendung und Reduktion von freiheitseinschränkenden Maßnahmen. Methodik: Für die Prozessevaluation einer pragmatischen cluster-randomisierten Studie wurden teilstrukturierte Einzel- (n = 4) und Fokusgruppeninterviews (n = 4) mit 22 Personen (vier Angehörige in der Rolle als Betreuer / -innen oder Vorsorgebevollmächtigte, eine Berufsbetreuerin, 16 Heimbeiräte) geführt und mittels qualitativer Inhaltsanalyse analysiert. Ergebnisse: Fünf Kategorien in Bezug auf freiheitseinschränkende Maßnahmen wurden gebildet: 1. Umgang im Setting Pflegeheim; 2. Bewertung der Anwendung bzw. Reduktion; 3. Information zur Anwendung bzw. Reduktion; 4. Entscheidungen zur Anwendung bzw. Reduktion; 5. Auswirkungen der Anwendung bzw. Reduktion. Interessenvertretungen sehen den Einsatz der Maßnahmen zur Sturzprophylaxe und Kontrolle von herausforderndem Verhalten als notwendig an und haben kaum Wissen zu Alternativen. Schlussfolgerungen: Angehörige, Berufsbetreuer / -innen und Heimbeiräte zeigen eher unkritische Haltungen und haben Informationsdefizite zu freiheitseinschränkenden Maßnahmen. Bei Interventionen zur Reduktion der Maßnahmen in Pflegeheimen könnte die Aufklärung dieser Gruppen unterstützend wirken.

Implementation of a multicomponent intervention to prevent physical restraints in nursing homes (IMPRINT): A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite clear evidence for the lack of effectiveness and safety, physical restraints are frequently applied in nursing homes. Multicomponent interventions addressing nurses' attitudes and organizational culture have been effective in reducing physical restraints.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of two versions of a guideline and theory-based multicomponent intervention to reduce physical restraints in nursing homes.

DESIGN

Pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

The study was conducted in 120 nursing homes in four regions in Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

All residents living in the participating nursing home during follow-up, newly admitted residents were also included. A total of 12,245 residents included in the primary analysis (4126 and 3547 residents in intervention group 1 and 2 and 4572 residents in the control group).

METHODS

Intervention group 1 received an updated version of a successfully tested guideline-based multicomponent intervention (comprising brief education for the nursing staff, intensive training of nominated key nurses in each cluster, introduction of a least-restraint policy and supportive material), intervention group 2 received a concise version of the original program and the control group received optimized usual care (i.e. supportive materials only). Primary outcome was physical restraint prevalence at twelve months, assessed through direct observation by blinded investigators. Intervention and control groups were compared using baseline-adjusted linear regression on cluster level, Bonferroni-adjusted for double testing. Secondary outcomes included falls, fall-related fractures, and quality of life. We also described intervention costs and performed a comprehensive process analysis.

RESULTS

At baseline, mean physical restraint prevalence was 17.4% and 19.6% in intervention groups 1 and 2, and 18.8% in the control group. After twelve months, mean prevalence was 14.6%, 15.7%, and 17.6%. Baseline-adjusted differences between mean prevalences were 2.0% (97.5% CI, -5.8 to 1.9) lower in intervention group 1 and 2.5% (97.5% CI, -6.4 to 1.4) lower in intervention group 2 compared to controls. Physical restraint prevalence showed a pronounced variation between the different clusters in all study groups. We found no significant differences in the secondary outcomes. According to the process evaluation, the intervention was mainly implemented as planned, but the expected change towards a least restraint culture of care was not achieved in all clusters.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither intervention showed a clear advantage compared to control. The pronounced center variation in physical restraint prevalence indicates that other approaches like governmental policies are needed to sustainably change physical restraint practice and reduce center variations in nursing homes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02341898.

Perinatal Nurses' Experiences With and Knowledge of the Care of Incarcerated Women During Pregnancy and the Postpartum Period

OBJECTIVE

To describe perinatal nurses' experiences of caring for incarcerated women during pregnancy and the postpartum period; to assess their knowledge of the 2011 position statement Shackling Incarcerated Pregnant Women published by the Association of Women's Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses (AWHONN); and to assess their knowledge of their states' laws regulating nonmedical restraint use, or shackling, of incarcerated women.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Online across the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

AWHONN members who self-identified as antepartum, intrapartum, postpartum, or mother-baby nurses (N = 923, 8.2% response rate).

METHODS

A link to an investigator-developed survey was e-mailed to eligible AWHONN members (N = 11,274) between July and September 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 74% (n = 690) of participants reported that they cared for incarcerated women during pregnancy or the postpartum period in hospital perinatal units. Of these, most (82.9%, n = 566) reported that their incarcerated patients were shackled sometimes to all of the time; only 9.7% reported ever feeling unsafe with incarcerated women who were pregnant. "Rule or protocol" was the most commonly endorsed reason for shackling. Only 17.0% (n = 157) of all participants knew about the AWHONN position statement, and 3% (n = 28) correctly identified the conditions under which shackling may ethically take place (risk of flight, harm to self, or harm to others). Only 7.4% (n = 68) of participants correctly identified whether their states had shackling laws.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest critical gaps in nurses' knowledge of professional standards and protective laws regarding the care of incarcerated women during pregnancy. Our findings underscore an urgent need for primary and continuing nursing education in this area.

Nursing professionals' attitudes toward use of physical restraints in Styrian nursing homes Austria

BACKGROUND

Given that nursing staff play a critical role in the decision regarding use of physical restraints, research has examined nursing professionals' attitudes toward this practice.

AIM

Since nursing professionals' views on physical restraint use have not yet been examined in Austria to date, we aimed to explore nursing professionals' attitudes concerning use of physical restraints in nursing homes of Styria (Austria).

METHOD

Data were collected from a convenience sample of nursing professionals (N = 355) within 19 Styrian nursing homes, based on a cross-sectional study design. Attitudes toward the practice of restraint use were assessed by means of the Maastricht Attitude Questionnaire in the German version.

RESULTS

The overall results showed rather positive attitudes toward the use of physical restraints, yet the findings regarding the sub-dimensions of the questionnaire were mixed. Although nursing professionals tended to deny "good reasons" for using physical restraints, they evaluated the consequences of physical restraint use rather positive and considered restraint use as an appropriate health care practice. Nursing professionals' views regarding the consequences of using specific physical restraints further showed that belts were considered as the most restricting and discomforting devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, Austrian nursing professionals seemed to hold more positive attitudes toward the use of physical restraints than counterparts in other Western European countries. Future nationwide large-scale surveys will be needed to confirm our findings.

Physical Restraint Use With Elderly Patients: Perceptions of Nurses and Nursing Assistants in Spanish Acute Care Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Physical restraint is often used during the hospitalization of elderly people. However, this procedure is associated with adverse outcomes; therefore, it is necessary to be aware of the circumstances that promote restraint use, such as the perceptions of professionals who use it.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the research was to determine the situations in which nursing staff considered the use of physical restraint as most important and to evaluate the possible associations with the sociodemographic and professional variables.

METHODS

A descriptive cross-sectional multicenter study was carried out in 52 units of eight Spanish acute hospitals. A survey of registered nurses and nursing assistants was used to collect data related to sociodemographic characteristics, experience, training in restraint use, and the Perception of Restraint Use Questionnaire (PRUQ)-which assesses the perceived importance of reasons frequently given for the use of physical restraint.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 508 registered nurses and 347 nursing assistants. Almost all (98%) had used physical restraint, and 82% thought their training in the use of physical restraint was insufficient. Nursing assistants scored higher than registered nurses (p < .005, d = .68) on PRUQ total score and individual item scores, suggesting they thought the factors were more important in restraint use. Both registered nurses and nursing assistants considered restraint as most important in the prevention of falls and in the removal of medical devices such as intravenous lines and urinary catheters. Associations between PRUQ total score and other variables (unit type, sociodemographic factors, hospital) were nonsignificant.

DISCUSSION

The professionals considered restraint as very important in preventing safety problems. In order to improve the quality of care, it is essential to identify the factors that can have an effect on the application of physical restraint. Educational programs are of fundamental importance, but to be more effective in reducing the use of physical restraint, they should address commonly held views on rationale for restraint use and be accompanied by institutional policies promoting a restraint-free environment.

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.

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.

Physical restraint deaths in a 13-year national cohort of nursing home residents

Objective

this paper aims to investigate the nature and extent of physical restraint deaths reported to Coroners in Australia over a 13-year period.

Methods

the study comprised a retrospective cohort study of residents dwelling in accredited nursing homes in Australia whose deaths were reported to the Coroners between 1 July 2000 and 30 June 2013 and was attributed to physical restraint.

Results

five deaths in nursing home residents due to physical restraint were reported in Australia over a 13-year period. The median age of residents was 83 years; all residents had impaired mobility and had restraints applied for falls prevention. Neck compression and entrapment by the restraints was the mechanism of harm in all cases, resulting in restraint asphyxia and mechanical asphyxia, respectively.

Conclusions

this national study confirms that the use of physical restraint does cause fatalities, although rare. Further research is still needed to identify which alternatives strategies to restraint are most effective, and to examine the reporting system for physical restraint-related deaths.

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.

[Effectiveness of training interventions aimed at reducing physical restraints in institutionalised older people: A systematic review]

There is some controversy about the use of physical restraints in institutionalised elderly people. The aim of this review is to analyse studies that evaluated the effectiveness of training interventions targeting interdisciplinary teams aimed at preventing, reducing or eliminating the use of physical restraints in nursing homes. A systematic search was performed in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and Web of Science to find clinical trials, published in English or in Spanish, that examined training sessions for interdisciplinary teams aimed at preventing, minimising or eliminating the use of physical restrains in institutionalised people over 65 years. Ten papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The findings show conflicting results on the effectiveness of training sessions. Furthermore, they lack sufficient empirical evidence to be able to assert that training sessions brought about a reduction in the use of physical restraints. More studies are needed that analyse the effectiveness of these interventions to prevent or eliminate the use of physical restraints in these institutions.

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.

Use of physical restraints in nursing homes: a multicentre cross-sectional study

Background

Although many countries have implemented strict legal rules, the prevalence of physical restraints in nursing homes seems to remain high. In Switzerland, data related to the frequency of physical restraints are scarce and little is known about associations with resident and nursing home characteristics. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and types of physical restraints in nursing homes in two Swiss cantons and to explore whether resident-related and organisational factors are associated with the use of physical restraints.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre cross-sectional study. Twenty nursing homes with 1362 residents from two culturally different cantons were included. Data on physical restraints and residents’ characteristics were extracted from residents’ records (11/2013 to 2/2014). Organisational data were collected by questionnaires addressing nursing home directors or nursing managers. Sample size calculation and outcome analysis took cluster-adjustment into account. Descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression analysis with nursing homes as random effect were used for investigation.

Results

The prevalence of residents with at least one physical restraint was 26.8 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 19.8–33.8). Centre prevalence ranged from 2.6 to 61.2 %. Bilateral bedrails were most frequently used (20.3 %, 95 % CI 13.5–27.1). Length of residence, degrees of care dependency and mobility limitation were significantly positively associated with the use of physical restraint, but none of the organisational characteristics was significantly associated.

Conclusion

Approximately a quarter of the nursing home residents included in our study experienced physical restraints. Since variation between nursing homes was pronounced, it seems to be worthwhile to explore nursing homes with particularly low and high use of physical restraints in future research, especially by using qualitative methods. There is a need for effective interventions aiming at restraint-free nursing care. Development of interventional approaches should consider specific residents’ characteristics associated with restraint use.

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.

Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in healthcare: revised guideline (CReDECI 2)

Background

Many healthcare interventions are of complex nature, consisting of several interacting components. Complex interventions are often described inadequately. A reporting guideline for complex interventions was published in 2012 (Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in healthcare, CReDECI) and was recently checked for its practicability. The reporting guideline was developed following the recommendations of the EQUATOR network but excluding a formal consensus process. Therefore, a consensus process was initiated, to revise the reporting guideline.

Methods

We used a three-phase consensus process consisting of (1) a web-based feedback survey on the published reporting guideline, (2) a face-to-face consensus conference, and (3) a final online review and feedback round to create the revised CReDECI. The consensus process was organized and conducted via the REFLECTION network.

Results

A total of 45 attendees from 16 European countries took part in the face-to-face consensus conference. The revised reporting guideline (CReDECI 2) comprises 13 items on three stages: development, feasibility and piloting, and evaluation of a complex intervention. Each item is illustrated by an explanation and an example. In contrast with most of the available reporting guidelines, CReDECI 2 does not focus on a specific study design, to reflect the use of different qualitative and quantitative designs and methods in the development and evaluation of complex interventions.

Conclusions

CReDECI 2 is a formally consented reporting guideline aiming to improve the reporting quality of the development and evaluation stages of complex interventions in healthcare. Since the guideline does not focus on a specific study design, design-specific reporting guidelines may additionally be used.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0709-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Perception of spanish nursing staff on the use of physical restraints

PURPOSE

To examine the perception of registered nurses and nursing assistants regarding the use of physical restraints with residents of nursing homes located in four of the regions of Spain; and to evaluate the relationship of these perceptions to the staff respondents' level of training.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional multicenter and correlational study. The research was conducted in 2013 in 19 Spanish nursing homes with 2,940 residential beds. A total of 785 nurses (170 registered nurses and 615 nursing assistants) participated in the study.

METHODS

The Perception of Restraint Use Questionnaire (PRUQ), consisting of 17 of the most cited reasons for using these devices, was used, as was a questionnaire capturing the sociodemographic characteristics and educational or experience level of staff respondents.

FINDINGS

Nurses reported the most important uses for restraints as prevention of falls and avoidance of medical device interference. As indicated by an average PRUQ score of 3.47, staff respondents supported restraint use, especially nursing assistants (3.59) as compared to registered nurses (3.00). With regard to training: 83.7% had participated in little, if any, training and only 29.2% had read three or more documents related to restraint use; 66.6% believed that their training was inadequate. No correlation was found between the results of the PRUQ and the respondents´ sociodemographic characteristics or participation in training activities. No differences were found among nurses by region.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to papers published in other countries, nurses in this study still consider it necessary to apply restraints in everyday practice. The education of nursing staff regarding restraint and knowledge of alternatives is needed; they should at least be aware of international standards of care regarding physical restraint use.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Most of the staff perceived their training related to the use of these devices as insufficient. Nursing assistants considered the use of restraints more important than did the registered nurses.

Staffing levels and the use of physical restraints in nursing homes: a multicenter study

There is an unclear relation between staffing levels and the use of physical restraints in nursing homes (NHs). A survey design was used in 570 older adults (median age = 86; 77.2% women), living on 23 wards within seven NHs. Restraint use was high (50% of residents, of which 80% were restrained on a daily basis). Multivariate analysis was conducted at the level of the individual wards. Neither staff intensity nor staff mix was a determinant of restraint use. Bathing dependency, transfer difficulties, risk for falls, frequent restlessness/agitation, and depression were independent predictors of restraint use. Patient characteristics have significant greater impact on physical restraint use than staffing levels. Therefore, improving knowledge and skills of NH staff to better deal with restlessness/agitation, mobility problems, and risk for falls is encouraged to decrease the use of physical restraints in NH residents.

Community-based home healthcare project for korean older adults

Objectives

The aim of this study was to identify the effects of community-based home healthcare projects that influence service performances with regard to Korean national long-term care insurance services in older adults.

Methods

The project's applicants were 18 operational agencies in national long-term care institutions in Korea, and participants were care recipients (n = 2263) registered in long-term care institutions. We applied our healthcare system to the recruited participants for a 3-month period from October 2012 to December 2012. We measured the community-based home healthcare services such as long-term care, health and medical service, and welfare and leisure service prior to and after applying the community-based home healthcare system.

Results

After the implementation of community-based home healthcare project, all community-based home healthcare services showed an increase than prior to the project implementation. The nutrition management service was the most increased and its increase rate was 628.6%. A comparison between the long-term care insurance beneficiaries and nonbeneficiaries showed that health and medical services’ increase rate of nonbeneficiaries was significantly higher than beneficiaries (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Our community-based home healthcare project might improve the service implementation for older adults and there was a difference in the increase rate of health and medical services between Korean national long-term care insurance beneficiaries and nonbeneficiaries.

[A Dutch roadmap for care without belts usage]

The use of physical restraints still is highly prevalent in institutional long term care settings for older people. We know that the use of restrictive measures, such as belt restraints, do have many negative consequences for residents, and even can be harmful to their health. However, this knowledge does not result in a reduction of physical restraints. This paper describes the search for an intervention (EXBELT) aiming to safely reduce and prevent the use of belt restraints in nursing homes. EXBELT consists of a promotion of institutional policy change that discourages use of belt restraints, nursing home staff education, availability of alternative interventions, and consultation by a nurse specialist. Effect evaluations show that EXBELT is effective on the short and long term. According to a process evaluation, EXBELT was largely performed according to protocol and very well received by nursing home staff and resident's relatives. However, concurrently it is stated that the reduction of physical restraints in Dutch nursing home care runs slowly. The conclusion is that continuing focus is needed to reduce physical restraints in nursing homes and to prevent its use in home care.

Quality of reporting of complex healthcare interventions and applicability of the CReDECI list - a survey of publications indexed in PubMed

Background

The development and evaluation of complex interventions in healthcare has obtained increased awareness. The Medical Research Council’s (MRC) framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions and its update offers guidance for researchers covering the phases development, feasibility/piloting, and evaluation. Comprehensive reporting of complex interventions enhances transparency and is essential for researchers and policy-makers. Recently, a set of 16 criteria for reporting complex interventions in healthcare (CReDECI) was published. The aim of this study is to evaluate the reporting quality in publications of complex interventions adhering to either the first or the updated MRC framework, and to evaluate the applicability of CReDECI.

Methods

A systematic PubMed search was conducted. Two reviewers independently checked titles and abstracts for inclusion. Trials on complex interventions adhering to the MRC framework and including an evaluation study in English and German were included. For all included trials and for all publications which reported on phases prior to the evaluation study, related publications were identified via forward citation tracking. The quality of reporting was assessed independently by two reviewers using CReDECI. Inter-rater agreement and time needed to complete the assessment were determined.

Results

Twenty-six publications on eight trials were included. The number of publications per trial ranged from 1 to 6 (mean 3.25). The trials demonstrate a good reporting quality for the criteria referring to the development and feasibility/piloting. For the criteria addressing the introduction of the intervention and the evaluation, quality of reporting varied widely. Two trials fulfilled 7 and 8 items respectively, five trials fulfilled one to five items and one trial offered no information on any item. The mean number of items with differing ratings per trial was two. The time needed to rate a trial ranged from 30 to 90 minutes, depending on the number of publications.

Conclusions

Adherence to the MRC framework seems to have a positive impact on the reporting quality on the development and piloting of complex interventions. Reporting on the evaluation could be improved. CReDECI is a practical instrument to check the reporting quality of complex interventions and could be used alongside design-specific reporting guidelines.

Attitudes of nurses towards the use of physical restraints in geriatric care: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies

OBJECTIVES

To examine nurses' attitudes towards the use of physical restraints in geriatric care.

DESIGN

Systematic review and synthesis of qualitative and quantitative studies.

DATA SOURCES

The following databases were searched: Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, Psyndex, PsychInfo, Social SciSearch, SciSearch, Forum Qualitative Social Research (1/1990 to 8/2013). We performed backward and forward citation tracking to all of the included studies.

REVIEW METHODS

We included in the present review all qualitative and quantitative studies in English and German that investigated nurses' attitudes towards the use of physical restraints in geriatric care. Two independent reviewers selected the studies for inclusion and assessed the study quality. We performed a thematic synthesis for the qualitative studies and a content analysis of the questionnaires' items as well as a narrative synthesis for the quantitative surveys.

RESULTS

We included 31 publications in the review: 20 quantitative surveys, 10 qualitative and 1 mixed-method study. In the qualitative studies, nurses' attitudes towards the use of physical restraints in geriatric care were predominately characterised by negative feelings towards the use of restraints; however, the nurses also described a perceived need for using restraints in clinical practice. This discrepancy led to moral conflicts, and nurses described several strategies for coping with these conflicts when restraints were used. When nurses were in doubt regarding the use of restraints, they decided predominantly in favour of using restraints. The results of the quantitative surveys were inconsistent regarding nurses' feelings towards the use of restraints in geriatric care. Prevention of falls was identified as a primary reason for using restraints. However, the items of the questionnaires focussed primarily on the reasons for the use of restraints rather than on the attitudes of nurses.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the lack of evidence regarding the benefits of restraints and the evidence on the adverse effects, nurses often decided in favour of using restraints when in doubt and they used strategies to cope with negative feelings when they used restraints. A clear policy change in geriatric care institutions towards restraint-free care seems to be warranted to change clinical practice. The results of this review should also be considered in the development of interventions aimed at reducing the use of restraints.

Risk factors associated with physical restraints in residential aged care facilities: a community-based epidemiological survey in Taiwan

AIM

To identify the rate and risk factors of physical restraint in residential aged care facilities in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND

In Taiwan, physical restraint is commonly used in aged care facilities to prevent accidents. Many are unaware of the associated risks. Restrained residents cannot move freely, increasing the risk of atrophy and leading to reduced physical functioning.

DESIGN

A community-based epidemiological survey.

METHODS

Data were collected from June-December 2007 across 178 residential aged care facilities with 5,173 residential beds in the target city of Taiwan. Twenty facilities were sampled using probability proportional to size by beds and accreditation ranking. In all, 256 primary caregivers (78 nurses and 178 care aides) and 847 residents completed the study questionnaires and tests. A multilevel analysis approach was used to identify individual- and facility-level risk factors for physical restraint and assess the variation in physical restraint at the individual- and facility-level.

RESULTS

Of 847 residents, 62% (527) were restrained during the study period. The main reasons for restraint use were fall prevention and prevention of tube removal. Resident level risk factors for physical restraint included lower Barthel Index scores (more dependent) and an agreement allowing the use of physical restraint to avoid injury signed by a family member or social worker. A facility-level risk factor for physical restraint was younger primary caregivers.

CONCLUSION

To reduce the incidence of physical restraint in residential aged care facilities in Taiwan, educational programmes should target primary caregivers and families in facilities.

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.