Predictors of physical restraint use in Canadian intensive care units

被引:69
|
作者
Luk, Elena [1 ]
Sneyers, Barbara [2 ]
Rose, Louise [1 ]
Perreault, Marc M. [3 ]
Williamson, David R. [3 ]
Mehta, Sangeeta [4 ]
Cook, Deborah J. [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Lapinsky, Stephanie C. [8 ]
Burry, Lisa [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Lawrence S Bloomberg Fac Nursing, Toronto, ON M5T 1P8, Canada
[2] Catholic Univ Louvain, Louvain Drug Res Inst, B-1200 Brussels, Belgium
[3] Univ Montreal, Fac Pharm, Montreal, PQ H3C 3J7, Canada
[4] Mt Sinai Hosp, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5, Canada
[5] McMaster Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Med, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[6] McMaster Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[7] McMaster Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[8] Univ Toronto, Fac Med, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
关键词
DAILY SEDATION INTERRUPTION; ENDOTRACHEAL; EXTUBATIONS; DELIRIUM;
D O I
10.1186/cc13789
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Introduction: Physical restraint (PR) use in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been associated with higher rates of self-extubation and prolonged ICU length of stay. Our objectives were to describe patterns and predictors of PR use. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study of analgosedation, antipsychotic, neuromuscular blocker, and PR practices in 51 Canadian ICUs. Data were collected prospectively for all mechanically ventilated adults admitted during a two-week period. We tested for patient, treatment, and hospital characteristics that were associated with PR use and number of days of use, using logistic and Poisson regression respectively. Results: PR was used on 374 out of 711 (53%) patients, for a mean number of 4.1 (standard deviation (SD) 4.0) days. Treatment characteristics associated with PR were higher daily benzodiazepine dose (odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.11), higher daily opioid dose (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06), antipsychotic drugs (OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.74 to 5.48), agitation (Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS) > 4) (OR 3.73, 95% CI 1.50 to 9.29), and sedation administration method (continuous and bolus versus bolus only) (OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.74 to 5.48). Hospital characteristics associated with PR indicated patients were less likely to be restrained in ICUs from university-affiliated hospitals (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.61). Mainly treatment characteristics were associated with more days of PR, including: higher daily benzodiazepine dose (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.07, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.13), daily sedation interruption (IRR 3.44, 95% CI 1.48 to 8.10), antipsychotic drugs (IRR 15.67, 95% CI 6.62 to 37.12), SAS < 3 (IRR 2.62, 95% CI 1.08 to 6.35), and any adverse event including accidental device removal (IRR 8.27, 95% CI 2.07 to 33.08). Patient characteristics (age, gender, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, admission category, prior substance abuse, prior psychotropic medication, pre-existing psychiatric condition or dementia) were not associated with PR use or number of days used. Conclusions: PR was used in half of the patients in these 51 ICUs. Treatment characteristics predominantly predicted PR use, as opposed to patient or hospital/ICU characteristics. Use of sedative, analgesic, and antipsychotic drugs, agitation, heavy sedation, and occurrence of an adverse event predicted PR use or number of days used.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Predictors of physical restraint use in Canadian intensive care units
    Elena Luk
    Barbara Sneyers
    Louise Rose
    Marc M Perreault
    David R Williamson
    Sangeeta Mehta
    Deborah J Cook
    Stephanie C Lapinsky
    Lisa Burry
    Critical Care, 18
  • [2] Physical Restraint Use in Turkish Intensive Care Units
    Turgay, Ayse San
    Sari, Dilek
    Genc, Rabia Ekti
    CLINICAL NURSE SPECIALIST, 2009, 23 (02) : 68 - 72
  • [3] Clinical decision making on the use of physical restraint in intensive care units
    Li, Xinqian
    Fawcett, Tonks N.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING SCIENCES, 2014, 1 (04): : 446 - 450
  • [4] USE OF PHYSICAL RESTRAINT IN DUTCH INTENSIVE CARE UNITS: PREVALENCE AND MOTIVES
    Raijmakers, R. J.
    Vroegop, R. L.
    van den Boogaard, M.
    van der Kooi, A. W.
    Slooter, A. J.
    INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE, 2012, 38 : S230 - S230
  • [5] Physical restraint in the emergency and intensive care units
    Smadja, J.
    Lemogne, C.
    Consoli, S.
    REANIMATION, 2012, 21 (06): : 696 - 701
  • [6] Analysis of a nurses' knowledge survey on the use of physical restraint in intensive care units
    Via-Clavero, G.
    Claramunt-Domenech, L.
    Garcia-Lamigueiro, A.
    Sanchez-Sanchez, M. M.
    Secanella-Martinez, M.
    Aguirre-Recio, E.
    Sandalinas-Mulero, I.
    Ortega-Guerrero, A.
    Yuste-Bustos, F.
    Delgado-Hito, P.
    ENFERMERIA INTENSIVA, 2019, 30 (02): : 47 - 58
  • [7] Adverse events related to physical restraint use in intensive care units: A review of the literature
    Berger, Sebastian
    Grzonka, Pascale
    Amacher, Simon A.
    Hunziker, Sabina
    Frei, Anja I.
    Sutter, Raoul
    JOURNAL OF INTENSIVE MEDICINE, 2024, 4 (03): : 318 - 325
  • [8] The effect of physical restraint on neurovascular complications in intensive care units
    Ertugrul, Busra
    Ozden, Dilek
    AUSTRALIAN CRITICAL CARE, 2020, 33 (01) : 30 - 38
  • [9] Predictors of physical restraint use on critical care units: An observational structural equation modeling approach
    Olds, Danielle
    Cramer, Emily
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2021, 118
  • [10] PREDICTORS OF NEW-ONSET PHYSICAL RESTRAINT USE IN ADULT INTENSIVE CARE UNIT PATIENTS
    Lawson, Thomas
    Balas, Michele
    Tan, Alai
    CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2019, 47