Review article: Scoping review of interventions that reduce mechanical restraint in the emergency department

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Joseph Lee, Daiv J Lown MBBS, FACEM, Patrick J Owen PhD, Judith Hope MBBS (Hons), MPM, PhD, FRANZCP
{"title":"Review article: Scoping review of interventions that reduce mechanical restraint in the emergency department","authors":"Joseph Lee,&nbsp;Daiv J Lown MBBS, FACEM,&nbsp;Patrick J Owen PhD,&nbsp;Judith Hope MBBS (Hons), MPM, PhD, FRANZCP","doi":"10.1111/1742-6723.14498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>Mechanical restraints are known to be associated with many undesirable outcomes in clinical settings. Our objective was to examine the current literature to explore possible interventions that would reduce the use of mechanical restraints in the ED.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In this scoping review, we searched online databases Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL for any studies published between the databases from 1 January 2007 to 19 September 2023. Studies were included if interventions were hospital- or staff-focused and reported measured outcomes before and after the introduction of the intervention. Risk of bias was assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Cohort Studies.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The search strategy yielded 1937 studies across the three databases, of which 13 studies were extracted and included in the review. Interventions were categorised into four groups: provision of staff training, addition of a de-escalation team, creation of a dedicated unit and introduction of an agitation scale only. Most of the studies saw reduction in restraint rates or time in restraints. Only the two studies that used an agitation scale as a stand-alone intervention saw no significant reduction. Only one study had low risk of bias, whereas the remainder had high risk.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Evidence supports further exploration of interventions that include: designing an agitation guideline; training staff in assessment, attitudinal and de-escalation skills; addition of a crisis team; and environmental changes in the form of adding a dedicated clinical space. Although these strategies may reduce mechanical restraint in the ED setting, further high-quality studies are needed before definitive conclusions may be drawn.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11604,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11744410/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1742-6723.14498","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Mechanical restraints are known to be associated with many undesirable outcomes in clinical settings. Our objective was to examine the current literature to explore possible interventions that would reduce the use of mechanical restraints in the ED.

Methods

In this scoping review, we searched online databases Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL for any studies published between the databases from 1 January 2007 to 19 September 2023. Studies were included if interventions were hospital- or staff-focused and reported measured outcomes before and after the introduction of the intervention. Risk of bias was assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Cohort Studies.

Results

The search strategy yielded 1937 studies across the three databases, of which 13 studies were extracted and included in the review. Interventions were categorised into four groups: provision of staff training, addition of a de-escalation team, creation of a dedicated unit and introduction of an agitation scale only. Most of the studies saw reduction in restraint rates or time in restraints. Only the two studies that used an agitation scale as a stand-alone intervention saw no significant reduction. Only one study had low risk of bias, whereas the remainder had high risk.

Conclusions

Evidence supports further exploration of interventions that include: designing an agitation guideline; training staff in assessment, attitudinal and de-escalation skills; addition of a crisis team; and environmental changes in the form of adding a dedicated clinical space. Although these strategies may reduce mechanical restraint in the ED setting, further high-quality studies are needed before definitive conclusions may be drawn.

Abstract Image

评论文章:减少急诊科机械束缚的干预措施范围综述。
目的:众所周知,在临床环境中,机械束缚与许多不良后果有关。我们的目的是研究当前的文献,探索减少急诊室使用机械束缚的可能干预措施:在此次范围界定综述中,我们检索了在线数据库 Embase、MEDLINE 和 Cochrane CENTRAL 中 2007 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 9 月 19 日期间发表的所有研究。如果干预措施以医院或员工为重点,并报告了干预措施实施前后的测量结果,则纳入研究。采用JBI队列研究批判性评估清单对偏倚风险进行评估:检索策略在三个数据库中检索到 1937 项研究,其中 13 项研究被提取并纳入综述。干预措施分为四类:提供员工培训、增设降级小组、创建专用单元和仅引入躁动量表。大多数研究表明,约束率或约束时间有所减少。只有两项研究将躁动量表作为单独的干预措施,但结果显示躁动量表的使用率没有明显降低。只有一项研究的偏倚风险较低,而其余研究的偏倚风险较高:有证据支持进一步探索干预措施,其中包括:设计躁动指南;对员工进行评估、态度和降级技能培训;增设危机处理小组;以及以增加专用临床空间的形式改变环境。尽管这些策略可以减少急诊室环境中的机械约束,但在得出明确结论之前,还需要进一步开展高质量的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Emergency Medicine Australasia
Emergency Medicine Australasia 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
13.00%
发文量
217
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Emergency Medicine Australasia is the official journal of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) and the Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine (ASEM), and publishes original articles dealing with all aspects of clinical practice, research, education and experiences in emergency medicine. Original articles are published under the following sections: Original Research, Paediatric Emergency Medicine, Disaster Medicine, Education and Training, Ethics, International Emergency Medicine, Management and Quality, Medicolegal Matters, Prehospital Care, Public Health, Rural and Remote Care, Technology, Toxicology and Trauma. Accepted papers become the copyright of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信