Stillman Kaytlena, Mirocha James, Geiderman Joel, Torbati Sam
Department of Emergency Medicine.
Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Research Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
J Emerg Med. 2023 Nov;65(5):e393-e402. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2023.05.008. Epub 2023 Jun 4.
Physical restraints are used in the emergency department (ED) for agitated patients to prevent self-harm and protect staff. Prior studies identified associations between sociodemographic factors and ED physical restraints use.
The primary objective was to compare characteristics of ED patients receiving physical restraints for violent and nonviolent indications vs. patients who were not restrained. The secondary objective was to compare rates of restraint use among ED providers.
This was a single-center cross-sectional study of adult ED patients from March 2019 to February 2021. Factors compared across groups were age over 50 years, gender, race, ethnicity, insurance, housing, primary language, Emergency Severity Index, time of arrival, mode of arrival, chief complaint, and medical admission. Odds ratios were reported. Rates of emergency physician restraint orders were compared using the chi-square test.
Restraints were used in 1228 (0.9%) visits. Younger age, male gender, "unknown" ethnicity, self-pay or "other" nonprivate insurance, homelessness, arrival by first responders, and medical hospitalization were associated with increased odds of restraint. Black patients had lower odds of any restraint than White patients (odds ratio 0.93; 95% confidence interval 0.79-1.09) and higher odds of violent restraint than White patients, although not significant (odds ratio 1.55; 95% confidence interval 0.95-2.54). ED providers had significant differences in total and violent restraint use (p-values < 0.0001 and 0.0003, respectively).
At this institution, certain sociodemographic characteristics were associated with receiving both types of physical restraint. Emergency physicians also differed in restraint-ordering practice. Further investigation is needed to understand the influence of implicit bias on ED restraint use.
急诊科会对烦躁不安的患者使用身体约束措施,以防止其自我伤害并保护医护人员。先前的研究确定了社会人口学因素与急诊科身体约束措施使用之间的关联。
主要目的是比较因暴力和非暴力指征接受身体约束的急诊科患者与未接受约束患者的特征。次要目的是比较急诊科医护人员的约束使用率。
这是一项对2019年3月至2021年2月期间成年急诊科患者进行的单中心横断面研究。对各组进行比较的因素包括年龄超过50岁、性别、种族、族裔、保险类型、住房情况、主要语言、急诊严重程度指数、到达时间、到达方式、主要诉求和住院情况。报告比值比。使用卡方检验比较急诊医生下达约束医嘱的比率。
在1228次(0.9%)就诊中使用了约束措施。年龄较小、男性、族裔“不明”、自费或“其他”非私人保险、无家可归、由急救人员送来以及住院治疗与接受约束的几率增加相关。黑人患者接受任何约束的几率低于白人患者(比值比0.93;95%置信区间0.79 - 1.09),接受暴力约束的几率高于白人患者,尽管差异不显著(比值比1.55;95%置信区间0.95 - 2.54)。急诊科医护人员在总体约束和暴力约束的使用上存在显著差异(p值分别<0.0001和0.0003)。
在该机构,某些社会人口学特征与接受两种类型的身体约束相关。急诊医生在下达约束医嘱的做法上也存在差异。需要进一步调查以了解隐性偏见对急诊科约束措施使用的影响。