Use of Electronic Health Record-Based Measures to Assess Quality of Care for Pediatric Agitation.

OBJECTIVES: Acute agitation during pediatric mental health emergency department (ED) visits presents safety risks to patients and staff. We previously convened multidisciplinary stakeholders who prioritized 20 proposed quality measures for pediatric acute agitation management. Our objectives were to assess feasibility of evaluating performance on these quality measures using electronic health record (EHR) data and to examine performance variation across 3 EDs. METHODS: At a children's hospital and 2 nonchildren's hospitals, we assessed feasibility of evaluating quality measures for pediatric acute agitation management using structured EHR data elements. We retrospectively evaluated measure performance during ED visits by children 5 to 17 years old who presented for a mental health condition, received medication for agitation, or received physical restraints from July 2020 to June 2021. Bivariate and multivariable regression were used to examine measure performance by patient characteristics and hospital. RESULTS: We identified 2785 mental health ED visits, 275 visits with medication given for agitation, and 35 visits with physical restraints. Performance was feasible to measure using EHR data for 10 measures. Nine measures varied by patient characteristics, including 4.87 times higher adjusted odds (95% confidence interval 1.28-18.54) of physical restraint use among children with versus without autism spectrum disorder. Four measures varied by hospital, with physical restraint use varying from 0.5% to 3.3% of mental health ED visits across hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of care for pediatric acute agitation management was feasible to evaluate using EHR-derived quality measures. Variation in performance across patient characteristics and hospitals highlights opportunities to improve care quality.

Pediatric Physical Restraint Coding in US Hospitals: A 2019 Kids Inpatient Database Study.

BACKGROUND: Reduction of physical restraint utilization is a goal of high-quality hospital care, but there is little nationally-representative data about physical restraint utilization in hospitalized children in the United States. This study reports the rate of physical restraint coding among hospitalizations for patients aged 1 to 18 years old in the United States and explores associated demographic and diagnostic factors. METHODS: The Kids' Inpatient Database, an all-payors database of community hospital discharges in the United States, was queried for hospitalizations with a diagnosis of physical restraint status in 2019. Logistic regression using patient sociodemographic characteristics was used to characterize factors associated with physical restraint coding. RESULTS: A coded diagnosis of physical restraint status was present for 8893 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8227-9560) hospitalizations among individuals aged 1 to 18 years old, or 0.63% of hospitalizations. Diagnoses associated with physical restraint varied by age, with mental health diagnoses overall the most frequent in an adjusted model, male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.56; 95% CI: 1.47-1.65), Black race (aOR 1.43; 95% CI: 1.33-1.55), a primary mental health or substance diagnosis (aOR 7.13; 95% CI: 6.42-7.90), Medicare or Medicaid insurance (aOR 1.33; 95% CI: 1.24-1.43), and more severe illness (aOR 2.83; 95% CI: 2.73-2.94) were associated with higher odds of a hospitalization involving a physical restraint code. CONCLUSIONS: Physical restraint coding varied by age, sex, race, region, and disease severity. These results highlight potential disparities in physical restraint utilization, which may have consequences for equity.

COVID-19 pandemic and emergency department visits for psychosis: Visit volume, restraint use, medication use, psychiatric hospitalization, and length of stay.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder were at heightened risk for interruptions in psychiatric care during the coronavirus-19 (COVID 19) pandemic. There is limited work exploring the pandemic's impact on emergency department (ED) visit volume, use of restraint and parenteral medications, inpatient psychiatric (IP) hospitalization, and ED length of stay (LOS) among this population. METHODS: We retrospectively examined 2134 ED visits with a billing code for psychosis between March 1, 2019-February 28, 2021. We used Poisson regression analysis to compare ED visit volume between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. Restraint use, parenteral antipsychotic or benzodiazepine use, IP hospitalization, and ED LOS were compared between the two periods using chi-square tests and independent samples t-tests. RESULTS: Overall volume of psychosis-related ED visits during the pandemic did not differ significantly from the prior year. Rates of restraint use (16.2 % vs 11.6 %, p < .01), parenteral antipsychotic (22.6 % vs 14.9, p < .001), and parenteral benzodiazepine (22.3 % vs 16.3 %, p < .001) use were significantly higher during the pandemic. Fewer patients had an IP hospital disposition during the pandemic than the year prior (57.8 % vs. 61.9 %, p < .05). ED LOS was longer during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic (28.37 h vs 20.26 h, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Although the volume of psychosis-related ED visits remained constant, restraint and parenteral medication use rates were significantly higher during the pandemic. ED LOS increased but fewer ED visits resulted in IP hospitalization. These findings underscore the importance of planning for increased acuity of psychosis ED presentations during public health emergencies.

Staff responses to interventions aiming to reduce mechanical restraint in adult mental health inpatient settings: a questionnaire-based survey.

PURPOSE: To explore mental health staff's responses towards interventions designed to reduce the use of mechanical restraint (MR) in adult mental health inpatient settings. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, questionnaire-based survey. The questionnaire, made available online via REDCap, presented 20 interventions designed to reduce MR use. Participants were asked to rate and rank the interventions based on their viewpoints regarding the relevance and importance of each intervention. RESULTS: A total of 128 mental health staff members from general and forensic mental health inpatient units across the Mental Health Services in the Region of Southern Denmark completed the questionnaire (response rate = 21.3%). A total of 90.8% of the ratings scored either 'agree' (45.2%) or 'strongly agree' (45.6%) concerning the relevance of the interventions in reducing MR use. Overall and in the divided analysis, interventions labelled as 'building relationship' and 'patient-related knowledge' claimed high scores in the staff's rankings of the interventions' importance concerning implementation. Conversely, interventions like 'carers' and 'standardised assessments' received low scores. CONCLUSIONS: The staff generally considered that the interventions were relevant. Importance rankings were consistent across the divisions chosen, with a range of variance and dispersion being recorded among certain groups.

Protocols to reduce seclusion in inpatient mental health units.

The use of seclusion to manage conflict behaviours in psychiatric inpatient settings is increasingly viewed as an intervention of last resort. Many protocols have, thus, been developed to reduce the practice. We conducted a systematic review to determine the effectiveness of protocols to reduce seclusion on process outcomes (e.g., seclusion, restraint), patient outcomes (e.g., injuries, aggressive incidents, satisfaction), and staff outcomes (e.g., injuries, satisfaction). We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials, PsycINFO, CINAHL, cairn.info, and ClinicalTrials.gov for protocols to reduce seclusion practices for adult patients on inpatient mental health units (from inception to September 6, 2022). We summarised and categorised reported elements of the protocols designed to reduce seclusion using the Behaviour Change Wheel Intervention Functions and resources needed to implement the protocol in psychiatric units. We assessed risk of bias and determined certainty of evidence using GRADE. Forty-eight reports addressed five approaches to reduce seclusion: hospital/unit restructuring (N = 4), staff education/training (N = 3), sensory modulation rooms (N = 7), risk assessment and management protocols (N = 7), and comprehensive/mixed interventions (N = 22; N = 6 without empirical data). The relationship between the various protocols and outcomes was mixed. Psychiatric units that implement architecturally positive designs, sensory rooms, the Brøset Violence Checklist, and various multi-component comprehensive interventions may reduce seclusion events, though our certainty in these findings is low due to studies' methodological limitations. Future research and practice may benefit from standardised reporting of process and outcome measures and analyses that account for confounders.

Racial Disparities in Emergency Department Physical Restraint Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Recent studies have demonstrated that people of color are more likely to be restrained in emergency department (ED) settings compared with other patients, but many of these studies are based at a single site or health care system, limiting their generalizability. Objective: To synthesize existing literature on risk of physical restraint use in adult EDs, specifically in reference to patients of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL was performed from database inception to February 8, 2022. Study Selection: Included peer-reviewed studies met 3 criteria: (1) published in English, (2) original human participants research performed in an adult ED, and (3) reported an outcome of physical restraint use by patient race or ethnicity. Studies were excluded if they were conducted outside of the US, or if full text was unavailable. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Four independent reviewers (V.E., M.M., D.D., and A.H.) abstracted data from selected articles following Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. A modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess quality. A meta-analysis of restraint outcomes among minoritized racial and ethnic groups was performed using a random-effects model in 2022. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): Risk of physical restraint use in adult ED patients by racial and ethnic background. Results: The search yielded 1597 articles, of which 10 met inclusion criteria (0.63%). These studies represented 2 557 983 patient encounters and 24 030 events of physical restraint (0.94%). In the meta-analysis, Black patients were more likely to be restrained compared with White patients (RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.19-1.43) and to all non-Black patients (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23-1.31). With respect to ethnicity, Hispanic patients were less likely to be restrained compared with non-Hispanic patients (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.81-0.89). Conclusions and Relevance: Physical restraint was uncommon, occurring in less than 1% of encounters, but adult Black patients experienced a significantly higher risk of physical restraint in ED settings compared with other racial groups. Hispanic patients were less likely to be restrained compared with non-Hispanic patients, though this observation may have occurred if Black patients, with a higher risk of restraint, were included in the non-Hispanic group. Further work, including qualitative studies, to explore and address mechanisms of racism at the interpersonal, institutional, and structural levels are needed.

A Risk Prediction Model for Physical Restraints Among Older Chinese Adults in Long-term Care Facilities: Machine Learning Study.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have identified risk factors for physical restraint (PR) use in older adults in long-term care facilities. Nevertheless, there is a lack of predictive tools to identify high-risk individuals. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop machine learning (ML)-based models to predict the risk of PR in older adults. METHODS: This study conducted a cross-sectional secondary data analysis based on 1026 older adults from 6 long-term care facilities in Chongqing, China, from July 2019 to November 2019. The primary outcome was the use of PR (yes or no), identified by 2 collectors' direct observation. A total of 15 candidate predictors (older adults' demographic and clinical factors) that could be commonly and easily collected from clinical practice were used to build 9 independent ML models: Gaussian Naïve Bayesian (GNB), k-nearest neighbor (KNN), decision tree (DT), logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), multilayer perceptron (MLP), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and light gradient boosting machine (Lightgbm), as well as stacking ensemble ML. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, precision, recall, an F score, a comprehensive evaluation indicator (CEI) weighed by the above indicators, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). A net benefit approach using the decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to evaluate the clinical utility of the best model. Models were tested via 10-fold cross-validation. Feature importance was interpreted using Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP). RESULTS: A total of 1026 older adults (mean 83.5, SD 7.6 years; n=586, 57.1% male older adults) and 265 restrained older adults were included in the study. All ML models performed well, with an AUC above 0.905 and an F score above 0.900. The 2 best independent models are RF (AUC 0.938, 95% CI 0.914-0.947) and SVM (AUC 0.949, 95% CI 0.911-0.953). The DCA demonstrated that the RF model displayed better clinical utility than other models. The stacking model combined with SVM, RF, and MLP performed best with AUC (0.950) and CEI (0.943) values, as well as the DCA curve indicated the best clinical utility. The SHAP plots demonstrated that the significant contributors to model performance were related to cognitive impairment, care dependency, mobility decline, physical agitation, and an indwelling tube. CONCLUSIONS: The RF and stacking models had high performance and clinical utility. ML prediction models for predicting the probability of PR in older adults could offer clinical screening and decision support, which could help medical staff in the early identification and PR management of older adults.

Physical restraint of dementia patients in acute care hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cohort analysis in Japan.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented challenges for the medical staff worldwide, especially for those in hospitals where COVID-19-positive patients are hospitalized. The announcement of COVID-19 hospital restrictions by the Japanese government has led to several limitations in hospital care, including an increased use of physical restraints, which could affect the care of elderly dementia patients. However, few studies have empirically validated the impact of physical restraint use during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to evaluate the impact of regulatory changes, consequent to the pandemic, on physical restraint use among elderly dementia patients in acute care hospitals. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we extracted the data of elderly patients (aged > 64 years) who received dementia care in acute care hospitals between January 6, 2019, and July 4, 2020. We divided patients into two groups depending on whether they were admitted to hospitals that received COVID-19-positive patients. We calculated descriptive statistics to compare the trend in 2-week intervals and conducted an interrupted time-series analysis to validate the changes in the use of physical restraint. RESULTS: In hospitals that received COVID-19-positive patients, the number of patients who were physically restrained per 1,000 hospital admissions increased after the government's announcement, with a maximum incidence of 501.4 per 1,000 hospital admissions between the 73rd and 74th week after the announcement. Additionally, a significant increase in the use of physical restraints for elderly dementia patients was noted (p = 0.004) in hospitals that received COVID-19-positive patients. Elderly dementia patients who required personal care experienced a significant increase in the use of physical restraints during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Understanding the causes and mechanisms underlying an increased use of physical restraints for dementia patients can help design more effective care protocols for similar future situations.

[Impact of family restrictions during COVID-19 pandemic on the use of physical restraint in an acute hospital: An observational study]. / Impacto de las restricciones de visitas de familiares de pacientes por la pandemia de COVID-19 sobre la utilización de la contención mecánica en un hospital de agudos: estudio observacional.

INTRODUCTION: During the worldwide pandemic of COVID-19 caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, hospitals developed contingency plans that transformed and reorganized the hospital activity. One of the measures was to restrict access to family members of hospitalized patients. The presence of the patient's family is considered an alternative to physical restraint. The aim of this study is to compare the use of physical restraint in hospitalized patients in an acute care hospital during the previous period of the pandemic of COVID-19 with the post-confinement period with hospitals being still closed to family. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We made an observational study that compares the prevalence of physical restraint in an acute care hospital during the previous period to the alarm state (February 2020) with the second period, when visits where restricted (May 2020). From the clinical history of the patients with physical restraint we collected the following variables: sex, diagnostic, hospital admission unit, reason for using physical restraint, localization, length, type of material, registration in the medical record, information given to the family, alternatives to the physical restraint and injuries related to the physical restraint. RESULTS: We evaluated 690 patients: 388 during the previous period and 320 during the second period. From all patients, 29 needed physical restraint. The use of physical restraint went from 8 (2%) to 21 (7%) (p=0.003). In the second period, a not statistically significant increase in continuous physical restraint was identified compared to the first period. CONCLUSIONS: The physical restraint prevalence has been superior during the second period in which families were not present with the hospitalized patients.

Decreasing the Use of Restraints on Children Admitted for Behavioral Health Conditions.

OBJECTIVES: Pediatric behavioral health admissions to children's hospitals for disposition planning are steadily increasing. These children may exhibit violent behaviors, which can escalate to application of physical limb restraints for safety. Using quality improvement methodology, we sought to decrease physical restraint use on children admitted to our children's hospital for behavioral health conditions from a baseline mean of 2.6% of behavioral health patient days to <1%. METHODS: We included all children ≥3 years of age admitted to our hospital medicine service with a primary behavioral health diagnosis from July 1, 2016, to February 1, 2020. A multidisciplinary team, formed in July 2018, tested interventions based on key drivers targeted toward our aim. The primary outcome measure was the percent of behavioral health patient days on which physical restraints were ordered. The balancing measure was the percent of patient days with a staff injury event. Statistical process control charts were used to view and analyze data. RESULTS: Our cohort included 3962 consecutive behavioral health patient encounters, encompassing a total of 9758 patient days. A 2-year baseline revealed physical restraint orders placed on 2.6% of behavioral health patient days, which was decreased to 0.9% after interventions and has been sustained over 19 months without any change in staff injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Team-based quality improvement methodology was associated with a sustained reduction in physical restraint use on children admitted for behavioral health conditions to our children's hospital. These results indicate that physical restraint use can be safely reduced in children's hospitals.

Physical Restraints in Critically Ill Children: A Multicenter Longitudinal Point Prevalence Study.

OBJECTIVES: We elucidate to investigate the prevalence of and factors associated with the use of physical restraints among critically ill or injured children in PICUs. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, longitudinal point prevalence study. SETTING: We included 26 PICUs in Japan. PATIENTS: Included children were 1 month to 10 years old. We screened all admitted patients in the PICUs on three study dates (in March, June, and September 2019). INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We collected prevalence and demographic characteristics of critically ill or injured children with physical restraints, as well as details of physical restraints, including indications and treatments provided. A total of 398 children were screened in the participating PICUs on the three data collection dates. The prevalence of children with physical restraints was 53% (211/398). Wrist restraint bands were the most frequently used means (55%, 117/211) for potential contingent events. The adjusted odds of using physical restraint in patients 1-2 years old was 2.3 (95% CI, 1.3-4.0) compared with children less than 1 year old. When looking at the individual hospital effect, units without a prespecified practice policy for physical restraints management or those with more than 10 beds were more likely to use physical restraints. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of physical restraints in critically ill or injured children was high, and significant variation was observed among PICUs. Our study findings suggested that patient age, unit size, and practice policy of physical restraint could be associated with more frequent use of physical restraints.

Antipsychotics in Inpatient Children and Adolescents with Seclusion and Restraint: A Preliminary Exploratory Retrospective Chart Review.

Objective: This study is a retrospective review of patients 5-17 years of age experiencing seclusion and/or restraint (S&R) in a pediatric psychiatric inpatient setting and an exploratory analysis of antipsychotic use on S&R duration. We examined whether administration of antipsychotics would possibly decrease the time spent in S&R. Methods: Reports of patients who underwent S&R in an acute care inpatient child and adolescent psychiatric unit from 2012 to 2014 were reviewed. Demographic information related to age, gender, and race as well as information on diagnosis, current medications (including antipsychotics) were obtained. Independent samples t-tests were used to determine whether there were differences in how much time patients spent in S&R based on whether they were administered antipsychotics or not. Odds ratios (ORs) of being administered antipsychotics during S&R were computed for factors such as gender, race, and diagnosis group. Results: Ninety-six patients (68 males, age range 5-17 years) were involved in 232 S&R events that occurred between 2012 and 2014. Results indicate that patients who were administered antipsychotics during S&R still spent significantly more time in S&R compared with those who were given medications other than antipsychotics (e.g., Benadryl) (t = 3.161; p = 0.002) and those who were not administered any medication (t = 3.54; p = 0.001). Binary logistic regression showed that female patients were at more than two times (OR(adjusted) = 2.86; 95% confidence interval = 1.234-6.655) higher risk of being administered antipsychotics while in S&R compared with their male counterparts within this particular sample. Conclusions: The results of our study indicate that, contrary to our hypothesis, antipsychotic administration did not appear to reduce the time spent in S&R compared with groups that were administered medications other than antipsychotics and those that were not administered any medication during S&R. We also found an increased risk of antipsychotic administration in female patients compared with male patients in S&R events, indicating the need for larger studies examining these effects in greater detail.

Reducing restrictive practice: a pertinent issue for children's services.

The reduction of restrictive practice has gained momentum in mental health services and it is now becoming evident in mainstream adult services. There remains confusion as to the definition of 'restrictive practices' across all sectors of health care, including the difference between 'restrictive practices' (such as attitudes of control, limit setting and unnecessary ward rules) and 'restrictive interventions' (including physical, chemical or mechanical restraint). This article highlights the relevance of restrictive practice to children's nursing and argues that the principles apply across all health provision. Acts of restrictive practice may result in challenging behaviour, or even restrictive interventions, strategies to minimise both restrictive practice and subsequent acts of challenging behaviour are explored. Behavioural support plans adopting a bio-psycho-pharmaco-social approach have been shown to be effective in both mental health and adult nursing and are recommended for use in children's nursing.

The Use of Restraint and Seclusion in Residential Treatment Care for Youth: A Systematic Review of Related Factors and Interventions.

Children placed in residential treatment centers (RTCs) typically present challenging behavior including aggression. In this context, restraint and seclusion (R&S) are seen as "last resort" strategies for educators to manage youth aggression. The use of R&S is controversial, as they can lead to psychological and physical consequences for both the client and the care provider and have yet to be empirically validated as therapeutic. The objectives of this systematic review are to identify the factors related to R&S use in RTCs for youth and to review the interventions aiming to reduce the use of R&S. The identification of these factors is the first step to gaining a better understanding of the decision-making process leading to the use of R&S and ultimately to reducing the use of these strategies to a minimum. Thus, the present systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, and PsycNET for articles published between 2002 and 2017. Key words used were synonyms of R&S, youth, and RTCs. Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria: must report on factors affecting the use of R&S in RTCs, must be conducted in RTCs for youth under the age of 21, and must report on original and empirical data. Factors related to the characteristics of the client, the care provider, and the environment, as well as to the implementation of programs for the reduction of R&S, were found to influence the use of R&S in RTCs. A conceptual model is presented. The implementation of programs to reduce R&S use is discussed.

The use of mechanical restraint in Pacific Rim countries: an international epidemiological study.

AIMS: The use of mechanical restraint is a challenging area for psychiatry. Although mechanical restraint remains accepted as standard practice in some regions, there are ethical, legal and medical reasons to minimise or abolish its use. These concerns have intensified following the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Despite national policies to reduce use, the reporting of mechanical restraint has been poor, hampering a reasonable understanding of the epidemiology of restraint. This paper aims to develop a consistent measure of mechanical restraint and compare the measure within and across countries in the Pacific Rim. METHODS: We used the publicly available data from four Pacific Rim countries (Australia, New Zealand, Japan and the United States) to compare and contrast the reported rates of mechanical restraint. Summary measures were computed so as to enable international comparisons. Variation within each jurisdiction was also analysed. RESULTS: International rates of mechanical restraint in 2017 varied from 0.03 (New Zealand) to 98.9 (Japan) restraint events per million population per day, a variation greater than 3000-fold. Restraint in Australia (0.17 events per million) and the United States (0.37 events per million) fell between these two extremes. Variation as measured by restraint events per 1000 bed-days was less extreme but still substantial. Within all four countries there was also significant variation in restraint across districts. Variation across time did not show a steady reduction in restraint in any country during the period for which data were available (starting from 2003 at the earliest). CONCLUSIONS: Policies to reduce or abolish mechanical restraint do not appear to be effecting change. It is improbable that the variation in restraint within the four examined Pacific Rim countries is accountable for by psychopathology. Greater efforts at reporting, monitoring and carrying out interventions to achieve the stated aim of reducing restraint are urgently needed.

Patient safety and bedrail use as a global phenomenon: A prevalence study.

Background: Although bedrail use may increase the risk of accidents among patients, bedrails are still extensively used in healthcare facilities. Therefore, the field calls for a review of bedrail use in practice. Objective: This report examined the prevalence and implications of bedrail use in rehabilitation facilities in Hong Kong. The findings are compared with the current state of bedrail use worldwide. Design and methods: This work is a cross-sectional, observational study. A secondary analysis was conducted on the database of a prospective trial. Bilateral bedrail use was observed in two Hong Kong rehabilitation hospitals. Logistic regression was performed to examine the factors associated with bedrail use. Results: A total of 3,384 restraint observations were made. The bedrail rate was 31.34%, which revealed that bedrail use was the second most commonly used physical restraint. The fall history (OR: 2.84), cognitive impairment (OR: 0.91) and functional dependency (OR: 0.79) of patients were significant predictors of bedrail use, p < .05. Conclusion: This study examines bedrail prevalence through direct observation, which is the preferred method for examining bedrail use in practice. We found that actual bedrail use is higher than the numbers reported in previous studies in Hong Kong. In addition, our research reveals that bedrails are commonly used for vulnerable patients. This finding highlights the need to change nurses' beliefs on bedrail use through education. The management of these health facilities should also aim to create an institutional environment that promotes the reduction of bedrail use. Implementation strategies on restraint reduction should also fit the culture of the organisation and local nursing practices, as well as the staff's values. Impact Statement: This study provides preliminary information about the widespread use of bedrails in Hong Kong and other countries. The research also introduces effective ways to achieve the reduction of bedrail use.

The Effect of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid's Inpatient Psychiatric Facility Quality Reporting Program on the Use of Restraint and Seclusion.

BACKGROUND: Patients in inpatient psychiatry settings are uniquely vulnerable to harm. As sources of harm, research and policy efforts have specifically focused on minimizing and eliminating restraint and seclusion. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid's Inpatient Psychiatric Facility Quality Reporting (IPFQR) program attempts to systematically measure and reduce restraint and seclusion. We evaluated facilities' response to the IPFQR program and differences by ownership, hypothesizing that facilities reporting these measures for the first time will show a greater reduction and that ownership will moderate this effect. METHODS: Using a difference-in-differences design and exploiting variation among facilities that previously reported on these measures to The Joint Commission, we examined the effect of the IPFQR public reporting program on the use and duration of restraint and seclusion from the end of 2012 through 2017. RESULTS: There were a total of 9705 observations of facilities among 1841 unique facilities. Results suggest the IPFQR program reduced duration of restraint by 48.96% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 16.69%-68.73%] and seclusion by 53.54% (95% CI, 19.71%-73.12%). There was no change in odds of zero restraint and, among for-profits only, a decrease of 36.89% (95% CI, 9.32%-56.07%) in the odds of zero seclusion. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first examination of the effect of the IPFQR program on restraint and seclusion, suggesting the program was successful in reducing their use. We did not find support for ownership moderating this effect. Additional research is needed to understand mechanisms of response and the impact of the program on nontargeted aspects of quality.

Restraint, seclusion and time-out among children and youth in group homes and residential treatment centers: a latent profile analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many children and youth living in residential units have experienced multiple traumas that may result in challenging behaviors. Among a range of professional responses, staff may use restraint, seclusion and time-out to manage these behaviors. OBJECTIVE: To enhance our understanding of these restrictive interventions in residential units as a means of improving professional practices involving children and youth in out-of-home care. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Administrative data were used. Restrictive intervention data for 324 children and youth (29 units) over a 6-month period were extracted. METHODS: Latent profile analysis was used to identify subgroups of children and youth with distinct restrictive intervention profiles. Children and youth in these profiles were compared on individual (age, sex, ethnic group, length of stay in unit, reasons for services) and environmental characteristics (unit type, type of services, specialized designation). RESULTS: Restrictive interventions, especially time-outs, were frequent (5136 interventions; 69% time-outs), yet approximately half of the sample did not experience any. Restraints, seclusions and time-outs differed in frequency, duration and reason for use. A two-profile model was favored for children and youth who were subjected to restrictive interventions (classification accuracy = 94%). Children and youth in these two profiles differed from each other, and from those not subjected to restrictive interventions, on numerous individual and environmental characteristics. CONCLUSION: The use of restrictive interventions is frequent, and attention should be paid to individual and environmental risk factors identified in this study (i.e., being a boy, non-Caucasian, taken into care for neglect, and having a longer stay in unit).

Factors associated with the use of physical restraint in intensive care patients.

OBJECTIVE: To verify the frequency of physical restraint in patients and the factors associated with its use in the intensive care unit. METHOD: An observational and prospective study on the use of restraint in patients observed over two days, considering the variables: age and gender, personal and clinical characteristics, devices, adverse event and restraint use. The frequency was verified in three groups of patients with different conditions by applying the Chi-Squared, Likelihood Ratio or Kruskal-Wallis tests. The association of the variables was verified with the Multinomial Logistic Regression. RESULTS: Eighty-four (84) patients participated. Restraint was observed in 77.4% of the 84 analyzed patients, and was more frequent in the presence of sedation, agitation and invasive devices. The chance of being restrained was at least five times higher in sedation conditions, whether in weaning or daily awakening, mechanical ventilation weaning, agitation or the presence of invasive devices. CONCLUSION: Restraint use was high and was associated with female gender, sedation, agitation and invasive airway. It is emphasized and important to apply policies to reduce restraint use in intensive care.