Planned change to implement a restraint reduction program

Coming to Grips-How Nurses Deal With Restlessness, Confusion, and Physical Restraints on a Neurological/Neurosurgical Ward

Physical restraints are viewed as potentially dangerous objects for patient safety. Contemporary efforts mainly focus on preventing bad outcomes in restraint use, while little attention is paid under what circumstances physical restraints are applied harmlessly. The aim of this research was to understand how physical restraints are used by neurology/neurosurgery ward nurses in relation to the protocol. In ethnographic action research, the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) was used to map and compare physical restraints as part of daily ward care against the protocol of physical restraints. Comparison between protocol and actual practice revealed that dealing with restlessness and confusion is a collective nursing skill vital in dealing with physical restraints, while the protocol failed to account for these aspects. Supporting and maintaining this skillset throughout this and similar nursing teams can prevent future misguided application physical restraints, offering valuable starting point in managing patient safety for these potentially dangerous objects.

Using a Decision Wheel to Reduce Use of Restraints in a Medical-Surgical Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Little information is available on the use of tools in intensive care units to help nurses determine when to restrain a patient. Patients in medical-surgical intensive care units are often restrained for their safety to prevent them from removing therapeutic devices. Research indicates that restraints do not necessarily prevent injuries or removal of devices by patients.

OBJECTIVES

To decrease use of restraints in a medical-surgical intensive care unit and to determine if a decision support tool is useful in helping bedside nurses determine whether or not to restrain a patient.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study design was used for this pilot study. Data were collected for each patient each shift indicating if therapeutic devices were removed and if restraints were used. An online educational activity supplemented by 1-on-1 discussion about proper use of restraints, alternatives, and use of a restraint decision tool was provided. Frequency of restraint use was determined. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to examine nurses' perceptions of the decision support tool.

RESULTS

Use of restraints was reduced 32%. No unplanned extubations or disruption of life-threatening therapeutic devices by unrestrained patients occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

With implementation of the decision support tool, nurses decreased their use of restraints yet maintained patients' safety. A decision support tool may help nurses who are undecided or who need reassurance on their decision to restrain or not restrain a patient.

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

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

Designing a falls prevention strategy that works

In implementing an evidence-based falls prevention strategy in acute care, planners are frequently pressed to meet organizational targets while allowing staff flexibility to match interventions with patient population needs and clinical realities. We describe the process of how one hospital creatively used evidence, systems change, staff engagement, expert consultation, policy and protocols, staff and patient education, marketing, and celebration to design and implement a falls prevention strategy on 60 clinical units that reduced annual fall rates by 20%.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

Restraint management: moving from outcome to process

Restraint management continues to be a challenge despite years of attention to the issue. This article demonstrates how a restraint prevention program, built on an analysis of care processes and a set of "bundled" interventions, can successfully decrease restraint prevalence and enhance safe patient care.

Reducing and/or minimising physical restraint in a high care, rural aged care facility

Background  This report takes you through a journey of implementing evidence-based best practice guidelines in relation to physical restraint in an aged care facility. It describes the processes involved in making changes to an existing system, introducing evidence-based guidelines and collaboratively achieving compliance with best practice. The project formed part of a combined initiative between the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing, called the Aged Care Clinical Fellowship Program. The Joanna Briggs Institute Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System, an online audit-based tool that includes an action research process Getting Research Into Practice was used to facilitate audit data collection and analysis. This report demonstrates that effective clinical leadership and evidence-based research, combined with a strategy of audit, feedback and re-audit, can become an effective change agent to improve clinical practice in residential aged care facilities. Aims/objectives  The aims of this project were to increase staff knowledge and awareness of restraints, improve practices in restraint assessment and usage, reduce or minimise the amount and type of restraints used and ensure the least restrictive device possible was utilised in a rural aged care facility. Methods  A system of audit, feedback and re-audit was performed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System software. This was completed in a series of stages over a period of 6 months. The first stage was to apply defining characteristics to each of the evidence-based audit criteria to determine compliance. A team of staff was set up to assist with the project. An initial audit was conducted, followed by a situational analysis of the findings. From this an action plan for improvement using Getting Research Into Practice was developed. The action plan was then implemented and the criteria re-audited and reviewed. Results  The initial audit confirmed non-compliance as expected in two criteria. All criteria showed improvement in the re-audit. Those criteria with the least compliance in the initial audit showed the most improvement in the re-audit. Conclusion  Effective change processes can be achieved when there is an identified reason or need for change, and when staff are aware of that need. With clinical leadership and education attitudes, fears and myths can be dispelled and improved performance will come out.

Development of the Video Assessment of Propensity to Use Emergency Restraints Scale (VAPERS): results of the VAPERS Study Group

BACKGROUND

Emergency physicians (EPs) may disagree on when or whether patients need restraints. There is no good objective measure of the likelihood of EPs to restrain patients.

OBJECTIVES

To 1) develop a scale to determine the likelihood that an EP would restrain a patient, 2) develop subscale scoring, and 3) determine a shortened version that correlates highly with the full scale.

METHODS

This was a prospective cross sectional study. The Video Assessment of Propensity to use Emergency Restraints Scale (VAPERS), consisting of 17 scenarios utilizing actors, was videotaped to produce a research video assessment tool. The VAPERS was designed by development experts to reflect the spectrum of patients who are considered for restraint in an emergency department. The VAPERS was piloted among a 22-member pilot panel of EPs (faculty and residents). The pilot panel was asked to determine the degree to which each video patient possessed the following patient characteristics: medical instability, trauma, belligerence, agitation, and altered mental status. Each "degree of characteristic" was measured on a separate 100-mm visual analog scale. Participants were then asked whether or not they would restrain each patient and whether the patient exhibited the potential to harm him- or herself or others. VAPERS subscales were developed for the likelihood to restrain patients with each of the patient characteristics. Spearman correlations were used for all comparisons. Linear regression was used to determine which patient characteristics were most related to likelihood to restrain and to develop a reduced scale to predict the overall likelihood to restrain.

RESULTS

The overall VAPERS score ranged from 0 to 100, with a median of 50 (interquartile range [IQR], 24-88). The visual analog scale results of how likely each video patient possessed specific characteristics were as follows: medical instability ranged from 0 to 100 (median, 32; IQR, 12-64), trauma ranged from 0 to 69 (median, 0; IQR, 0-31), belligerence ranged from 20 to 93 (median, 28; IQR, 14-63), agitation ranged from 3 to 84 (median, 52; IQR, 23-72), and altered mental status ranged from 1 to 93 (median, 29; IQR, 16-69). Linear regression indicated that two characteristic variables (danger to self and degree of agitation) in the video scenarios were highly correlated (0.87) with overall likelihood to restrain. Based on the results, the authors developed a shortened video assessment tool consisting of five of the original videos that were highly correlated (R = 0.94) with the full VAPERS scale on overall likelihood to restrain.

CONCLUSIONS

The VAPERS scale covers a wide range of important variables in emergency situations. It successfully measured likelihood to restrain in this pilot study for overall situations, and for subgroups, based on patient characteristics. A shortened five-video VAPERS also successfully measured the overall likelihood to restrain.

Does access to bed-chair pressure sensors reduce physical restraint use in the rehabilitative care setting?

BACKGROUND

The common use of physical restraints in older people in hospitals and nursing homes has been associated with injurious falls, decreased mobility and disorientation. By offering access to bed-chair pressure sensors in hospitalized patients with perceived fall risk, nurses may be less inclined to resort to physical restraints, thereby improving clinical outcomes.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether the access of bed-chair pressure sensors reduces physical restraint use in geriatric rehabilitation wards.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Consecutively, patients admitted to two geriatric wards specialized in stroke rehabilitation in a convalescent hospital in Hong Kong, and who were perceived by nurses to be at risk of falls were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. For the intervention group subjects, nurses were given access to bed-chair pressure sensors. These sensors were not available to control group subjects, as in usual practice. The trial continued until discharge. The primary outcomes were the proportion of subjects restrained by trunk restraint, bedrails or chair-board and the proportion of trial days in which each type of physical restraint was applied. The secondary outcomes were the proportions of those who improved in the mobility and transfer domains of modified Barthel index on discharge and of those who fell.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty subjects were randomized. Fifty (55.6%) out of the 90 intervention group subjects received the intervention. There was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups in the proportions and duration of having the three types of physical restraints. There was also no group difference in the chance of improving in mobility and transfer ability, and of having a fall.

CONCLUSION

Access to bed-chair pressure sensor device neither reduced the use of physical restraints nor improved the clinical outcomes of older patients with perceived fall risk.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The provision of bed-chair pressure sensors may only be effective in reducing physical restraints when it is combined with an organized physical restraint reduction programme.

Physical and chemical restraints in acute care: Their potential impact on the rehabilitation of older people

Agitation is a major problem for older people and is present in over half of the hospitalizations for people > 65 years of age. In a previous study by the authors, results indicated that nursing actions often did not meet best-practice standards in the care of older, agitated patients. This paper builds on these results by reviewing the literature pertaining to the use of restraints and contributes to the body of knowledge surrounding the impact of the acute-care experience on rehabilitation outcomes. Successful rehabilitation relies on the improvement of functional health outcomes and, for this to happen, physical and emotional well-being are important. The sequelae of restraint use in acute care have the potential to alter peoples' ability to participate fully in a rehabilitation programme, thereby placing their future placement at risk. This paper explores the outcomes of restraint use in the acute-care setting and presents the argument that their effects are likely to be detrimental to rehabilitation outcomes.

A synthesis of what we know about the use of physical restraints and seclusion with patients in psychiatric and acute care settings: 2003 update

PURPOSE

This article is an update of the January 19, 2000, Volume 7, Number 2 article of the synthesis of research findings on the use of restraint and seclusion with patients in psychiatric and acute care settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The little that is known about restraint/seclusion use with these populations is inconsistent. Attitudes and perceptions of patients, family, and staff differ. However, all patients had very negative feelings about both, whether they were restrained/secluded or observed by others who were not restrained. The reasons for restraint/seclusion use vary with no accurate use rate for either. What precipitates the use of restraint/seclusion also varies, but professionals claim they are necessary to prevent/treat violent or unruly behavior. Some believe seclusion/restraint is effective, but there is no empirical evidence to support this belief. Many less restrictive alternatives have been tested with varying outcomes. Several educational programs to help staff learn about different ways to handle violent/confused patients have been successful.

IMPLICATIONS

Until more is known about restraint/seclusion use from prospective controlled research, the goal to use least restrictive methods must be pursued. More staff educational programs must be offered and the evaluation of alternatives to restraint/seclusion pursued. When seclusion/restraint is necessary, it should be used less arbitrarily, less frequently, and with less trauma. As the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) and the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) have prescribed, "Seclusion and restraint must be a last resort, emergency response to a crisis situation that presents imminent risk of harm to the patient, staff, or others" (p. 25) [99A].

Perceptions of older people who have experienced physical restraint

It is well documented that the use of physical restraints on older people has been linked to negative clinical outcomes. However, less is known about the personal perspective of those who have been restrained. This study examines the perceptions of older people who have experienced physical restraints in a rehabilitation ward. A purposive sample was used of 17 male and female patients who were restrained. The patients were interviewed using the Subjective Experience of Being Restrained instrument (Strumpf and Evans, 1988) which is a semi-structured interview schedule. The most commonly used restraint devices included side rails, screw-on tabletops and reclining chairs. The data were analysed using content analysis. The results indicate mixed feelings regarding physical restraints. Patients' impressions of physical restraints included indifference of the devices to their perceived safety value. Overall, a minority of patients (n = 4) had positive feelings about physical restraints as they provided a sense of security to them. However, the negative comments of the patients were more prevalent and their responses were categorized in terms of institutional control, ritualised care, entrapment and discomfort, and possible alternatives.