Use of Physical Restraints in South Australia's Nursing Homes

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.

Programme d'intervention visant à réduire l'utilisation des contentions physiques dans des unités de soins de longue durée — mise en oeuvre et effets sur le personnel soignant

This study aimed at (a) developing a restraint reduction program, (b) describing its implementation in long-term care units, and (c) examining its effects on care staff's perceptions of and knowledge about the use of restraints. The program was composed of three parts: consciousness-raising meetings, staff education, and clinical follow-up. The study was a randomized, controlled clinical trial with eight intervention care units (five nursing homes) and 11 controls (five additional nursing homes). Care staff was surveyed at two time intervals over a 7-month period (pre- and post-test intervention; intervention care units: N = 171 [T0] and N = 158 [T1]; controls: N = 181 [T0] and N = 166 [T1]). The implementation of the program was successful and results showed significant changes in care staff perceptions of and knowledge about the use of restraints.

Reasons for physically restraining patients and residents: a systematic review and content analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine why people are physically restrained in the acute and residential care settings.

METHOD

A comprehensive search was undertaken of electronic databases to identify studies addressing the reasons for using physical restraint. Findings were synthesised using content analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were identified. The most common reason for using restraints related to patient-oriented issues such as ensuring the safety of people. However, they are also commonly used to facilitate treatment, maintain the social environment and because of issues such as understaffing.

An analysis of falls in the hospital: can we do without bedrails?

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of introduction of a bedrail policy, and an educational program, on patient falls and fall-related injuries.

DESIGN

A prospective "Before and After" design.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

All patients admitted during 1 calendar year in an assessment, treatment, and rehabilitation unit for older people.

INTERVENTION

A policy change for the use of bedrails (restricting their use) and an educational program about their effects.

MEASUREMENTS

Patient fall rates -- all falls and around the bed falls -- and patient and staff injuries.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in the number of beds with bedrails attached after the policy introduction (mean of 40/135 vs 18.5/135, respectively, P = .02), but the fall rate (either total or around the bed) did not change significantly. Serious injuries were significantly less common after the bedrail policy was introduced (P = .008), with fewer head injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing the use of bedrails did not alter patient fall rates significantly, but it was associated with a reduction in serious injuries. Unless it can be shown that bedrails are beneficial, their continued use in older patients must be seriously questioned.