Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore · 2005
Use of physical restraints in nursing homes: current practice in Singapore.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mamun K, Lim J
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: One of the indicators of quality care in nursing homes is the proper use of physical restraints. Restraints have been associated with multiple complications, such as pressure ulcers, incontinence and immobility. The aim of our study was to assess the indication, use and complications related to physical restraints in Singapore nursing homes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All residents aged >65 years old from 3 nursing homes were included in the study. A geriatrician reviewed the medical records of all elderly residents on restraints. Nursing staff interviews were also done to assess their knowledge regarding restraint use. A brief medical record review was also done for the elderly residents without restraints.
RESULTS: Out of 390 elderly residents, 91 were on physical restraints. The mean age of these residents were 80.1 years; 67% were female, 90.1% were Chinese and 82.4% belonged to functional category IV. Both urinary and faecal incontinence were observed in 97.8% of residents. Forty-six (50.5%) residents had no documented indication for restraints. It was noted that 20 (22%) residents were restrained to prevent dislodgement of the feeding tube, 17 (18.7%) were restrained to prevent falls and 8 (8.8%) were restrained for agitation. There were documented trials of removal of restraints for only 21 (23.1%) residents. Alternative approaches, such as diversion technique, were used for 31 (34.1%) residents to avoid restraint use.
CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a high rate of restraint use in the nursing homes. A restraint protocol should be available in every nursing home, requiring physician approval for the long-term application of physical restraints and intermittent reviews by physicians to assess the continued need for restraints.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All residents aged >65 years old from 3 nursing homes were included in the study. A geriatrician reviewed the medical records of all elderly residents on restraints. Nursing staff interviews were also done to assess their knowledge regarding restraint use. A brief medical record review was also done for the elderly residents without restraints.
RESULTS: Out of 390 elderly residents, 91 were on physical restraints. The mean age of these residents were 80.1 years; 67% were female, 90.1% were Chinese and 82.4% belonged to functional category IV. Both urinary and faecal incontinence were observed in 97.8% of residents. Forty-six (50.5%) residents had no documented indication for restraints. It was noted that 20 (22%) residents were restrained to prevent dislodgement of the feeding tube, 17 (18.7%) were restrained to prevent falls and 8 (8.8%) were restrained for agitation. There were documented trials of removal of restraints for only 21 (23.1%) residents. Alternative approaches, such as diversion technique, were used for 31 (34.1%) residents to avoid restraint use.
CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a high rate of restraint use in the nursing homes. A restraint protocol should be available in every nursing home, requiring physician approval for the long-term application of physical restraints and intermittent reviews by physicians to assess the continued need for restraints.