The use of mechanical restraint in critical care units: Characterisation, application standards and related factors. Results of a multicentre study.

Enferm Intensiva (Engl Ed)

Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Puerta de Hierro-Segovia de Arana (IDIPHISA), Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain; Unidad de Bioestadística, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain.

Published: December 2022

Objectives: To describe and characterise the use of mechanical restraint (MR) in critical care units (CCU) in terms of frequency and quality of application and to study its relationship with pain/agitation-sedation/delirium, nurse:patient ratio and institutional involvement.

Method: Multicentre observational study conducted in 17 CCUs between February and May 2016. The observation time per CCU was 96 h. The main variables were the prevalence of restraint, the degree of adherence to MR recommendations, pain/agitation-sedation/delirium monitoring and institutional involvement (protocols and training of professionals).

Results: A total of 1070 patients were included. The overall prevalence of restraint was 19.11%, in patients with endotracheal tube (ETT) 42.10% and in patients without ETT or artificial airway it was 13.92%. Adherence rates between 0% and 40% were obtained for recommendations related to non-pharmacological management and between 0% and 100% for those related to monitoring of ethical-legal aspects. The lower prevalence of restraint was correlated with adequate pain monitoring in non-communicative patients (P < .001) and with the provision of training for professionals (P = .020). An inverse correlation was found between the quality of the use of MR and its prevalence, both in the general group of patients admitted to CCU (r = -.431) and in the subgroup of patients with ETT (r = -.521).

Conclusions: Restraint is especially frequently used in patients with ETT/artificial airway, but is also used in other patients who may not meet the use profile. There is wide room for improvement in non-pharmacological alternatives to the use of MC, ethical and legal vigilance, and institutional involvement. Better interpretation of patient behaviour with validated tools may help limit use of MR.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enfie.2021.12.003DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

prevalence restraint
12
mechanical restraint
8
restraint critical
8
critical care
8
care units
8
units characterisation
4
characterisation application
4
application standards
4
standards factors
4
factors multicentre
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!