Physical Restraint Use in Intensive Care Units: Exploring the Decision-Making Process and New Proposals. A Multimethod Study.
María Acevedo-NuevoMaría Teresa González-GilMaría Concepción Martin-ArribasPublished in: International journal of environmental research and public health (2021)
A total of 1070 patients were observed, amounting to a median prevalence of PR use of 19.11% (min: 0%-max: 44.44%). The differences observed between ICUs could be explained by a difference in restraint conceptualization. The various actors involved jointly build up a health care culture and a conceptualization of the terms "safety-risk", which determine decision-making about the use of restraints at each ICU. These shared meanings are the germ of beliefs, values, and rituals which, in this case, determine the greater or lesser use of restraints. There were different profiles of PR use among the units studied: preventive restraints versus "Zero" restraints. The differences corresponded to aspects such as: systematic use of tools for assessment of PAD; interpretation of patient behavior; the decision-making process, the significance attributed to patient safety and restraints; and the feelings generated by PR use. The restraint-free model requires an approach to safety from a holistic perspective, with the involvement of all team members and the family.
Keyphrases
- decision making
- patient safety
- intensive care unit
- healthcare
- quality improvement
- stress induced
- end stage renal disease
- ejection fraction
- newly diagnosed
- risk factors
- mechanical ventilation
- prognostic factors
- palliative care
- physical activity
- patient reported outcomes
- patient reported
- health insurance
- acute respiratory distress syndrome