Bedrails: do they have a benefit?

The effect of a restraint reduction program on physical restraint rates in rehabilitation settings in Hong Kong

Background. In view of the adverse effects of using restraints, studies examining the use of restraint reduction programs (RRPs) are needed. Objectives. To investigate the effect of an RRP on the reduction of physical restraint rates in rehabilitation hospitals. Methods. A prospective quasi-experimental clinical trial was conducted. Demographic data, medical and health-related information on recruited patients from two rehabilitation hospitals, as well as facility data on restraint rates were collected. Results. The increase in the restraint rate in the control site was 4.3 times greater than that in the intervention site. Changes in the restraint mode, from continuous to intermittent, and the type of restraint used were found between the pre- and postintervention periods in both the control site and the intervention site. Discussion. Compared with that in the control site, the RRP in the intervention site helped arrest any increase in the restraint rate although it had no effect on physical restraint reduction. The shift of restraint mode from continuous to intermittent in the intervention site was one of the positive outcomes of the RRP.

Description of an advanced practice nursing consultative model to reduce restrictive siderail use in nursing homes

Researchers have demonstrated that the use of physical restraints in nursing homes can be reduced, particularly where advanced practice nurses (APNs) are utilized. We examined the link between APN practice, siderail reduction, and the costs of siderail alternatives in 273 residents in four Philadelphia nursing homes. The majority of participants were cognitively and physically impaired with multiple co-morbidities. APNs recommended a total of 1,275 siderail-alternative interventions aimed at reducing fall risk. The median cost of siderail alternatives to prevent falls per resident was $135. Residents with a fall history experienced a significantly higher cost of recommendation compared to non-fallers. Findings suggest that an APN consultation model can effectively be implemented through comprehensive, individualized assessment without incurring substantial costs to the nursing home.

Consequences of an intervention to reduce restrictive side rail use in nursing homes

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of an advanced practice nurse (APN) intervention on restrictive side rail usage in four nursing homes and with a sample of 251 residents. A secondary question explored the association between restrictive side rail reduction and bed-related falls.

DESIGN

Pre- and posttest design.

SETTING

Four urban nursing homes.

PARTICIPANTS

All nursing home residents present in the nursing home at three time points (n=710, 719, and 707) and a subset of residents (n=251) with restrictive side rail use at baseline.

INTERVENTION

APN consultation with individual residents and facility-wide education and consultation.

MEASUREMENTS

Direct observation of side rail status, resident and nurse interview for functional status, mobility, cognition, behavioral symptoms, medical record review for demographics and treatment information, and incident reports for fall data.

RESULTS

At the institutional level, one of the four nursing homes significantly reduced restrictive side rail use (P=.01). At the individual participant level, 51.4% (n=130) reduced restrictive side rail use. For the group that reduced restrictive side rails, there was a significantly (P<.001) reduced fall rate (-0.053; 95% confidence interval (CI)=-0.083 to -0.024), whereas the group that continued restrictive side rail did not demonstrate a significantly (P=.17) reduced fall rate (-0.013; 95% CI=-0.056-0.030).

CONCLUSION

An APN consultation model can safely reduce side rail use. Restrictive side rail reduction does not lead to an increase in bed-related falls. Although side rails serve many purposes, routine use of these devices to restrict voluntary movement and prevent falls is not supported.

Side rail use and bed-related fall outcomes among nursing home residents

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the effect of physical restraint reduction on nighttime side rail use and to examine the relationship between bilateral side rail use and bed-related falls/injuries among nursing home residents.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of data collected in a longitudinal, prospective clinical trial designed to reduce restraint use.

SETTING

Three nonprofit nursing homes.

PARTICIPANTS

To examine the first question regarding the effect of physical restraint reduction on side rail usage, we included all nursing home residents who survived a 1-year data collection period (n = 463). To answer the second research question concerning the relationship between side rail status and bed-related falls, subjects' side rail status for each of the four data collection periods was compared. The sample for this analysis includes only those with consistent side rail status (n = 319) for the four observations periods: either 0/1 side rail (n = 188) or 2 (bilateral) side rails (n = 131).

MEASUREMENTS

Side rail and restraint status was directly observed by two research assistants, twice each night shift (10 p.m.-6 a.m.) for three nights at each of four data collection points. Nighttime fall-related outcome data were obtained from a review of nursing home incident reports during the entire 1-year data collection period (T1 through T4). Cognitive status was measured using the Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination. Functional and behavioral status was obtained using subscales of the Psychogeriatric Dependency Rating Scale.

RESULTS

Over a 1-year period, there was an increase in the proportion of bilateral side rail use for all three nursing homes. Based on the multiple logistic regression analysis, there was no indication of a decreased risk of falls or recurrent falls with bilateral side rail use, controlling for cognition and functional and behavioral status (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.45,2.03). Similarly, bilateral side rail use did not reduce the risk of recurrent falls, controlling for cognition and functional status (AOR = 1.25, 95% CI = 0.33,4.67).

CONCLUSION

Despite high usage of bilateral side rails, they do not appear to significantly reduce the likelihood of falls, recurrent falls, or serious injuries. Bed-related falls remain clinically challenging. The data from this study, coupled with increasing reports of side rail-related injuries and deaths, compel us to seek and empirically test alternative interventions to prevent bed-related falls.

Relatives' perceptions of side rail use on the older person in hospital

With an increasing emphasis on improving standards in the care of older people, the use of physical restraints has received growing attention in the nursing literature. Physical restraint use has been likened to abuse as it impedes the movement of a person, encourages dependence on staff and denies autonomy. Side rails (cot sides, bed rails) can be considered as a physical restrain device. The therapeutic use of restraint has not previously been adequately explained. Furthermore, there is a dearth of literature examining the personal experience of physical restraint use. The Family Interview Guide (Strumpf and Evans, 1988) was used to explore perceptions of nine relatives whose family had side rails used during their care in an older person ward. The findings of the study suggest that while families place value on the perceived safety function of side rails, they nonetheless have worries about their use. These pertain to the risk of patient entrapment and possible injury. Patients' relatives associated side rails with ritualized practice in gerontology and make suggestions for the re-design of side rails. The study also highlights the potential for increased family participation in the decision to use side rails.