开发一种基于证据的工具来证明在普通成人病房中使用身体约束的合理性:一项系统综述。

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Lap Fung Tsang, Kin Fung So, Cheuk Fung Ng, Tak Po Cheung, Ka Po Lo, Siu Keung Tang, Lok Man Leung
{"title":"开发一种基于证据的工具来证明在普通成人病房中使用身体约束的合理性:一项系统综述。","authors":"Lap Fung Tsang, Kin Fung So, Cheuk Fung Ng, Tak Po Cheung, Ka Po Lo, Siu Keung Tang, Lok Man Leung","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Physical restraint is commonly applied in the clinical settings despite numerous studies presenting its paucity of efficacy and safety. Despite the various tangible and intangible factors associated with moral and safety issues, nurses must make decisions on restraint use in ethical dilemmas. Health care providers often find it challenging to make appropriate decisions regarding the use of physical restraint in demanding clinical environments without a standard and objective assessment tool.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives aimed to identify effective instrument to justify the decision-making regarding the use of physical restraint in general adult ward settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted on several electronic databases, including Medline, PubMed, CINAHL Complete, Embase, and Cochrane Library, using subject MeSH headings and relevant keywords to identify any relevant studies pertaining to the research question. Only articles written in English from January 2014 to March 2024 were considered. The search was filtered by screening for articles with the full-text availability, cohort studies that are not considered an experimental studies, systematic reviews, or meta-analysis. The reference lists of literatures were also searched to identify any further relevant studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies were included in this review, consisting of 6 cohort studies, 1 stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial, and 1 systematic review. The quality of the studies ranged from low to moderate, with the risk of bias being moderate to high. The interventions retrieved from the included studies can be categorized as restraint decision instruments, restraint preventive interventions and restraint preventive strategies. All included studies reported a significantly improved rate of restrained patients in the intervention group comparing to the control group. The rate of restrained patient days decreased significantly in the intervention group. There was no significant difference in the rate and number of accidental catheter removal, fall incident, and length of stay.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Implementing the evidence-based instrument can help improve patient outcomes, reduce inappropriate use of physical restraint, and provide a structured decision-making process for health care staff. An evidence-based assessment instrument is developed to assess patients who are necessary to be given physical restraint, and further stringent research is necessary to evaluate the effect of such instrument. Training on least restrictive techniques and effective strategies is crucial for nurses to ensure adherence of nurses and appropriate care for patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of an Evidence-Based Instrument to Justify the Use of Physical Restraint in General Adult Ward Settings: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Lap Fung Tsang, Kin Fung So, Cheuk Fung Ng, Tak Po Cheung, Ka Po Lo, Siu Keung Tang, Lok Man Leung\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Physical restraint is commonly applied in the clinical settings despite numerous studies presenting its paucity of efficacy and safety. Despite the various tangible and intangible factors associated with moral and safety issues, nurses must make decisions on restraint use in ethical dilemmas. Health care providers often find it challenging to make appropriate decisions regarding the use of physical restraint in demanding clinical environments without a standard and objective assessment tool.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives aimed to identify effective instrument to justify the decision-making regarding the use of physical restraint in general adult ward settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted on several electronic databases, including Medline, PubMed, CINAHL Complete, Embase, and Cochrane Library, using subject MeSH headings and relevant keywords to identify any relevant studies pertaining to the research question. Only articles written in English from January 2014 to March 2024 were considered. The search was filtered by screening for articles with the full-text availability, cohort studies that are not considered an experimental studies, systematic reviews, or meta-analysis. The reference lists of literatures were also searched to identify any further relevant studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies were included in this review, consisting of 6 cohort studies, 1 stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial, and 1 systematic review. The quality of the studies ranged from low to moderate, with the risk of bias being moderate to high. The interventions retrieved from the included studies can be categorized as restraint decision instruments, restraint preventive interventions and restraint preventive strategies. All included studies reported a significantly improved rate of restrained patients in the intervention group comparing to the control group. The rate of restrained patient days decreased significantly in the intervention group. There was no significant difference in the rate and number of accidental catheter removal, fall incident, and length of stay.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Implementing the evidence-based instrument can help improve patient outcomes, reduce inappropriate use of physical restraint, and provide a structured decision-making process for health care staff. An evidence-based assessment instrument is developed to assess patients who are necessary to be given physical restraint, and further stringent research is necessary to evaluate the effect of such instrument. Training on least restrictive techniques and effective strategies is crucial for nurses to ensure adherence of nurses and appropriate care for patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Patient Safety\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Patient Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000001380\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000001380","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管许多研究表明物理约束缺乏有效性和安全性,但物理约束通常应用于临床环境。尽管与道德和安全问题相关的各种有形和无形因素,护士必须在道德困境中做出约束使用的决定。卫生保健提供者经常发现,如果没有标准和客观的评估工具,就在要求苛刻的临床环境中使用身体约束做出适当的决定是具有挑战性的。目标:目标旨在确定有效的工具,以证明在一般成人病房环境中使用身体约束的决策是合理的。方法:在Medline、PubMed、CINAHL Complete、Embase和Cochrane Library等多个电子数据库中进行文献检索,使用主题MeSH标题和相关关键词识别与研究问题相关的任何相关研究。仅考虑2014年1月至2024年3月期间用英文撰写的文章。通过筛选具有全文可用性的文章、不被认为是实验研究的队列研究、系统综述或荟萃分析的文章来过滤搜索。检索文献的参考文献列表,以确定是否有进一步的相关研究。结果:本综述纳入8项研究,包括6项队列研究、1项楔形随机对照试验和1项系统评价。研究质量从低到中等,偏倚风险从中到高。从纳入的研究中检索到的干预措施可分为约束决策工具、约束预防干预和约束预防策略。所有纳入的研究报告,与对照组相比,干预组限制患者的发生率显著提高。干预组患者受约束天数明显减少。两组在意外拔管率和次数、跌倒事件和住院时间方面无显著差异。结论:实施循证工具有助于改善患者预后,减少身体约束的不当使用,并为卫生保健人员提供结构化的决策过程。我们开发了一种基于证据的评估工具来评估是否需要进行身体约束的患者,需要进一步严格的研究来评估这种工具的效果。培训限制最少的技术和有效的策略对护士来说至关重要,以确保护士的依从性和对患者的适当护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of an Evidence-Based Instrument to Justify the Use of Physical Restraint in General Adult Ward Settings: A Systematic Review.

Background: Physical restraint is commonly applied in the clinical settings despite numerous studies presenting its paucity of efficacy and safety. Despite the various tangible and intangible factors associated with moral and safety issues, nurses must make decisions on restraint use in ethical dilemmas. Health care providers often find it challenging to make appropriate decisions regarding the use of physical restraint in demanding clinical environments without a standard and objective assessment tool.

Objectives: The objectives aimed to identify effective instrument to justify the decision-making regarding the use of physical restraint in general adult ward settings.

Methods: A literature search was conducted on several electronic databases, including Medline, PubMed, CINAHL Complete, Embase, and Cochrane Library, using subject MeSH headings and relevant keywords to identify any relevant studies pertaining to the research question. Only articles written in English from January 2014 to March 2024 were considered. The search was filtered by screening for articles with the full-text availability, cohort studies that are not considered an experimental studies, systematic reviews, or meta-analysis. The reference lists of literatures were also searched to identify any further relevant studies.

Results: Eight studies were included in this review, consisting of 6 cohort studies, 1 stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial, and 1 systematic review. The quality of the studies ranged from low to moderate, with the risk of bias being moderate to high. The interventions retrieved from the included studies can be categorized as restraint decision instruments, restraint preventive interventions and restraint preventive strategies. All included studies reported a significantly improved rate of restrained patients in the intervention group comparing to the control group. The rate of restrained patient days decreased significantly in the intervention group. There was no significant difference in the rate and number of accidental catheter removal, fall incident, and length of stay.

Conclusions: Implementing the evidence-based instrument can help improve patient outcomes, reduce inappropriate use of physical restraint, and provide a structured decision-making process for health care staff. An evidence-based assessment instrument is developed to assess patients who are necessary to be given physical restraint, and further stringent research is necessary to evaluate the effect of such instrument. Training on least restrictive techniques and effective strategies is crucial for nurses to ensure adherence of nurses and appropriate care for patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Patient Safety
Journal of Patient Safety HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.60%
发文量
302
期刊介绍: Journal of Patient Safety (ISSN 1549-8417; online ISSN 1549-8425) is dedicated to presenting research advances and field applications in every area of patient safety. While Journal of Patient Safety has a research emphasis, it also publishes articles describing near-miss opportunities, system modifications that are barriers to error, and the impact of regulatory changes on healthcare delivery. This mix of research and real-world findings makes Journal of Patient Safety a valuable resource across the breadth of health professions and from bench to bedside.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信