Experience of patients with restraints in acute care hospitals and the view of their relatives: A qualitative study.

AIM: To describe the experiences of patients and relatives with any form of restraints in somatic acute care hospitals. DESIGN: Qualitative explorative design. METHODS: Qualitative research methods were used. Participants were recruited through clinical nursing specialists in participating departments of a university hospital between June and August 2020. Individual interviews were conducted and analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Four interviews with patients and five interviews with relatives were conducted with a mean duration of 25 min. The following three topics emerged in the analysis as important: What was perceived as restraints, Assessing the experiences of restraint use on a continuum, and Lack of information about restrictive measures. Patients and relatives defined restraint very broadly and assessed the experiences of restraint on a continuum from positive to negative, with a more critical view from patients. Relatives clearly seemed to approve of the use of restraints in acute care hospitals because it provided them with a sense of security. In general, there seemed to be a lack of information about the use of restraint and its effects on patients and relatives alike. CONCLUSION: The involvement of patients and relatives in the decision-making process about restraint use seems to be low. Healthcare professionals need to be better educated to be able to pass on adequate information and to involve patients and their relatives adequately in all processes of restraint use. However, when relatives are involved in decision-making as proxies for patients, it is important to consider that patients' and relatives' opinions on restraints may differ. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and relatives agreed to participate in the study and shared their experiences with us.

["If certain tensions are present, it affects everyone": Multiple case study on processes of coercive measures.] / "Wenn gewisse Spannungen da sind, wirkt das auf alle ein".

"If certain tensions are present, it affects everyone": Multiple case study on processes of coercive measures. Abstract: Background: There is an urgent need to reduce coercive measures in psychiatric care. The interaction between patients, nursing staff and medical professionals influences the course of a coercive measure. Aim: The interaction before, during and after coercive measures will be described and compared from the perspectives of the parties involved in order to identify a potential for prevention and quality improvement. Methods: A multiple case study of three coercive measures was conducted, each consisting of interviews with three participants, case documentation, photos, and observation. The data material was analysed thematically with subsequent single-case and cross-case analysis. Results: The thematic analysis revealed three areas of tension: tension and relaxation, humaneness and dehumanisation, as well as safety and autonomy. The stage before coercion was characterised by interacting tensions and the influence of emotions and stress. In all cases, a verbal communication gap was present. During the coercive measure, the quality of interactions between patients and nurses determined their experience. After coercion, the impacts of the measure on the persons and their relationships as well as reflections were the focus. Conclusions: De-escalation techniques turn out to be a key issue, whereby special attention should be paid to emotional and nonverbal aspects in the future. The results underline the relevance of empathy and respect throughout the process for prevention as well as for quality of care. Debriefings of coercive measures should be conducted routinely.

Restraint practice in the somatic acute care hospital: A participant observation study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe daily restraint practices and the factors which influence their use, from an outsider's perspective. BACKGROUND: A reduction in restraint use is recommended in health care. However, somatic acute care hospital settings currently lack effective reduction strategies. Thus far, hospital restraint practice is described in terms of quantitative assessments and the 'insider' view of healthcare professionals. However, as factors such as routine or personal beliefs seem to play a relevant role in restraint use, these approaches might be incomplete and biased. DESIGN: A qualitative observation study design was employed. METHODS: Fieldwork with unstructured participant observation was conducted at a department of geriatrics and a department of intensive care in Switzerland between November 2019 and January 2020. Data were recorded as field notes. The analysis was conducted iteratively in two coding cycles using descriptive coding followed by pattern coding. We adhered to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). RESULTS: A total of 67 hours of observation were conducted. We found that daily restraint practice can be described in three categories: the context in which restraints are used, the decision-making process on the use and continued use of restraints, and the avoidance of restraint use. Most processes and decisions seem to take place unconsciously, and their standardisation is weak. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of standardisation favours intuitive and unreflective action, which is prompted by what is also known as heuristic decision-making. To transform daily restraint practice, a technical solution that leads restraint management in line with ethical and legal requirements might be useful. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The outsider perspective has allowed daily restraint practice to be described independently of existing routines, departmental cultures and personal attitudes. This is important to comprehensively describe restrictive practices, which is a prerequisite for the development of effective restraint reduction strategies.

Restraining patients in acute care hospitals-A qualitative study on the experiences of healthcare staff.

AIM: The focus was to explore the perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers with respect to the use of restraints in acute care hospitals. DESIGN: The study followed a qualitative design. METHODS: Three topic-based focus group interviews were conducted, involving 19 participants from the fields of nursing, physical therapy and medicine. For data collection and analysis, the method of mapping techniques for rapid qualitative data analysis was used. After discussing and validating the individual mind maps, all data were condensed to identify the key findings. RESULTS: Participants described restraints as safety measures for the patients. The implementation of most restraints was led by nurses. The use of restraints differed significantly, even in the interprofessional team. Attitudes and experiences were the main determinants for restraint use. Nurses asked for more discussion about restraints in the team, for more support at an interprofessional level and for better guidelines to help with the decision-making process.

Restraint use as a quality indicator for the hospital setting: a secondary data analysis.

INTRODUCTION: A reduction in restraint use is recommended for all health care settings. For this purpose, local or national quality measurement and improvement initiatives have been implemented in various countries, primarily in the mental health and long-term care settings. However, restraints are also frequently used in the somatic acute care hospital setting, and strong variations in their prevalence rates have been reported. Therefore, the aim of this study was to reanalyse existing data on restraint use in Swiss hospitals in order to assess the potential of restraint use as a national quality indicator for the hospital setting. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional, multicentre design, data were collected between 2016 and 2018 as part of the ANQ"s (Swiss National Association for Quality Development in Hospitals and Clinics) "falls and pressure ulcers" national prevalence measurement in acute care hospitals in Switzerland. The hospitals measured restraint use on a voluntary basis in addition to falls and pressure ulcers. All medical specialities and patients aged 18 and over who gave their informed consent were included in the measurement. Descriptive and multilevel regression analyses were performed using institutional, ward and patient-level data relating to restraint use. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 18,938 inpatients from 55 hospitals. The 30-day prevalence rate of patients with at least one restraint was 10.2% (n = 1933). The risk-adjusted hospital comparison revealed that hospitals in Switzerland differ significantly in their restraint use, even after adjusting for patient characteristics. In total, 10 hospitals used restraints significantly less and 12 used them significantly more than the national average. CONCLUSION: Restraint use varies significantly between Swiss hospitals: 40% of all hospitals used restraints either significantly more or significantly less often than the average. In comparison to the other quality indicators, this is a very high value, indicating potential for improvements in the quality of care. Since restraint use is associated not only with quality of care, but also with human rights, these large differences seem questionable from a professional, ethical and legal point of view. Clearer and binding regulations in combination with monitoring and benchmarking of restraint use in hospitals, such as with a national quality indicator, seem necessary. These would help to ensure that restraint use is in alignment with professional values, as well as ethical and legal requirements.

Team efficacy and leadership in managing aggressive situations in the general hospital setting: A qualitative descriptive analysis of focus groups with ward managers.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore the perception and issues regarding the ability of nursing teams to manage patient and visitor aggression in clinical practice, from ward managers' perspectives. BACKGROUND: Patient and visitor aggression causes substantial human suffering and financial damage in healthcare organisations. Nurse managers are key persons for developing their teams' efficacy in dealing with patient and visitor aggression. However, their perception of patient and visitor aggression in clinical practice has rarely been explored, and issues relating to team management in this context are underinvestigated. DESIGN: A secondary, qualitative thematic analysis of focus group interviews. METHODS: Five focus groups consisting of a total of 30 ward and deputy ward managers from five Swiss hospitals were interviewed with audio recording between December 2015-January 2016. Since the recordings were rich in additional content exceeding the primary research question, a secondary analysis was conducted to answer the questions: (1) Which factors influence team efficacy in regard to patient and visitor aggression? (2) What are the implications for nurse leadership? The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research was followed in the conduct and reporting of this study. RESULTS: Three themes emerged from our analysis: (a) contextual factors (organisational safety culture and collaboration), (b) influences from within the team (team culture, nursing aggression and general management principles) and (c) implications for nurse leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Managing patient and visitor aggression is a challenge for nurse managers. A team's ability to prevent, de-escalate and debrief after PVA incidents is an important leadership task in which ward managers are neither supported in nor trained for within their organisations. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurse managers in general hospitals require more support to enable their teams to cope effectively with patient and visitor aggression. Policy and guideline implementation need to be prioritised.