BMC medical ethics · 2026
A systematic scoping review and interpretive ethical synthesis of ethical decision-making about physical restraints for older adults in Confucian-influenced care contexts.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание 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.
Feng Xiaoyan, Zhu Hongjun, Shang Liyun, Tao Yuanyuan
Аннотация
AIM: This study aims to map and interpret the evidence on ethical decision-making in the use of physical restraints for older adults, with particular attention to Confucian-influenced family-centred care contexts and comparative international evidence.
DESIGN: This study applied a systematic scoping review design combined with an interpretive ethical synthesis.
METHODS: The review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute approach to scoping reviews and reported with reference to PRISMA principles. Medline/PubMed, CINAHL Plus, CNKI, Google Scholar and ResearchGate were searched for English and Chinese literature published from 1 January 2015 to 30 September 2025. Searches combined terms for physical restraint, older adults, decision-making, ethics, family/proxy decision-making and Confucian or filial-piety contexts. Of 757 records identified, 526 records remained after duplicate removal, 46 full-text reports were assessed, and eight studies were included. Because the evidence base combined qualitative, quantitative and review studies, findings were integrated through a staged interpretive ethical synthesis. Empirical findings were first coded descriptively, then compared across evidence types, and finally interpreted through bioethical concepts including autonomy, relational autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, dignity, substituted judgement, vulnerability and culturally situated family responsibility. Primary empirical studies were given greater analytic weight than review articles, which were used mainly for conceptual contextualisation.
RESULTS: Four analytically linked themes were identified: contextual determinants of restraint decisions in care settings; balancing autonomy, relational autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence; nurses' ethical dilemmas and moral distress; and family or proxy decision-making shaped by substituted judgement, vulnerability, filial responsibility and culturally situated expectations of care.
DESIGN: This study applied a systematic scoping review design combined with an interpretive ethical synthesis.
METHODS: The review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute approach to scoping reviews and reported with reference to PRISMA principles. Medline/PubMed, CINAHL Plus, CNKI, Google Scholar and ResearchGate were searched for English and Chinese literature published from 1 January 2015 to 30 September 2025. Searches combined terms for physical restraint, older adults, decision-making, ethics, family/proxy decision-making and Confucian or filial-piety contexts. Of 757 records identified, 526 records remained after duplicate removal, 46 full-text reports were assessed, and eight studies were included. Because the evidence base combined qualitative, quantitative and review studies, findings were integrated through a staged interpretive ethical synthesis. Empirical findings were first coded descriptively, then compared across evidence types, and finally interpreted through bioethical concepts including autonomy, relational autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, dignity, substituted judgement, vulnerability and culturally situated family responsibility. Primary empirical studies were given greater analytic weight than review articles, which were used mainly for conceptual contextualisation.
RESULTS: Four analytically linked themes were identified: contextual determinants of restraint decisions in care settings; balancing autonomy, relational autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence; nurses' ethical dilemmas and moral distress; and family or proxy decision-making shaped by substituted judgement, vulnerability, filial responsibility and culturally situated expectations of care.