Department of Medical Sciences, University of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy.
Ethics Management for Clinical Practice Area, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Giuliano Isontina, 34149 Trieste, Italy.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Dec 3;18(23):12764. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182312764.
Physical restraints are still a common problem across healthcare settings: they are triggered by patient-related factors, nurses, and context-related factors. However, the role of some devices (e.g., bed rails), and those applied according to relatives'/patients' requests have been little investigated to date. A mixed-method study in 2018, according to the Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study criteria was performed. In the quantitative phase, patients with one or more physical restraint(s) as detected through observation of a single index day in 37 Italian facilities (27 long-term, 10 hospital units, =4562 patients) were identified. Then, for each patient with one or more restraint(s), the nurse responsible was interviewed to gather purposes and reasons for physical restraints use. A thematic analysis of the narratives was conducted to (a) clarify the decision-making framework that had been used and (b) to assess the differences, if any, between hospital and long-term settings. The categories 'Restrictive' and 'Supportive' devices aimed at 'Preventing risks' and at 'Promoting support', respectively, have emerged. Reasons triggering 'restrictive devices' involved patients' risks, the health professionals' and/or the relatives' concerns. In contrast, the 'supportive' ones were triggered by patients' problems/needs. 'Restrictive' and 'Supportive' devices were applied based on the decision of the team or through a process of shared decision-making involving relatives and patients. According to the framework that emerged, long-term care patients are at increased risk of being treated with 'restrictive devices' (Odds Ratio 1.87, Confidence Interval 95% 1.44; 2.43; < 0.001) as compared to those hospitalized. This study contributes to the improvement in knowledge of the definition, classification and measurement of physical devices across settings.
它们是由患者相关因素、护士和环境相关因素引发的。然而,迄今为止,一些设备(如床栏)的作用以及根据亲属/患者要求应用的设备的作用还没有得到充分的研究。2018 年进行了一项混合方法研究,根据混合方法研究报告的良好标准进行。在定量阶段,通过在 37 个意大利设施(27 个长期设施,10 个医院病房,=4562 名患者)中的单一索引日观察发现,有一名或多名身体约束的患者。然后,对每个有一名或多名约束的患者,对负责的护士进行访谈,以收集使用身体约束的目的和原因。对叙述进行了主题分析,以 (a) 阐明所使用的决策框架,以及 (b) 评估医院和长期环境之间是否存在差异。出现了“限制”和“支持”设备类别,分别旨在“预防风险”和“促进支持”。触发“限制”设备的原因涉及患者的风险、卫生专业人员和/或亲属的担忧。相比之下,“支持性”的设备则是由患者的问题/需求触发的。“限制”和“支持”设备是根据团队的决定或涉及亲属和患者的共同决策过程来应用的。根据出现的框架,与住院患者相比,长期护理患者使用“限制”设备的风险更高(比值比 1.87,95%置信区间 1.44;2.43;<0.001)。这项研究有助于提高对身体设备在不同环境下的定义、分类和测量的认识。