Abstract

BackgroundPhysical restraint, e.g. bedrails or belts in beds or chairs, are commonly used in nursing homes. However, there have been reports of pronounced differences in the prevalence between different facilities. Guidelines or other documents with recommendations for clinical practice are one approach to overcome centre variation and improve the quality of care. Rigorous development methods are deemed to ensure the validity, clarity and clinical applicability of practice recommendations. This study aims at describing the development methods of documents offering recommendations on physical restraint reduction in geriatric long-term care.MethodsWe performed a systematic search (February 2014) in electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Gerolit, Carelit), the World Wide Web (via google.de) and on the homepages of 34 international scientific or healthcare organisations, using various terms related to documents offering guidance for clinical practice and physical restraints. All German and English language documents with recommendations for clinical practice aimed at reducing physical restraints’ in nursing homes were included. Documents targeting mental health or acute care settings were excluded. Two reviewers independently selected the documents and extracted data, using a self-developed and piloted data extraction form.ResultsWe identified 28 documents from Germany, USA, Australia, Switzerland, Canada and UK, published between 2002 and 2014. The documents were developed or published by governmental organisations, nursing or healthcare organisations, non-profit organisation, research institutions and private organisations. Two documents were developed mono-disciplinary (nursing) and eight documents interdisciplinary (including different healthcare professionals, lawyers or other stakeholders). In 18 documents the composition of the development group was not described. Two documents described the methods used for developing the recommendations. In both documents, the recommendations were based on a systematic literature search, critical appraisal of the evidence and developed in a consensus process. Materials or tools supporting the implementation were mentioned in 18 documents.ConclusionsThis review shows that most of the identified documents with recommendations to reduce physical restraints in nursing homes did not adhere to rigorous scientific development methods. Only two documents comprised a systematic literature search and critical appraisal. Guidance aimed to inform clinical practice should rely on transparent and evidence-based methodologically with sound developed recommendations.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-015-0150-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • Physical restraint, e.g. bedrails or belts in beds or chairs, are commonly used in nursing homes

  • Systematic search of documents A systematic search was performed (Febuary 2014) to identify documents which focus on reducing the use of physical restraints in nursing homes by offering recommendations for clinical practice

  • We focus on the development methods of the identified documents; the content of the recommendations is not part of the analysis

Read more

Summary

Introduction

E.g. bedrails or belts in beds or chairs, are commonly used in nursing homes. This study aims at describing the development methods of documents offering recommendations on physical restraint reduction in geriatric long-term care. Epidemiological studies revealed pronounced differences in the prevalence of PR between nursing homes [1, 2, 17] These differences cannot be explained by characteristics of the residents or the facilities (such as staffing level or staff training) [1, 2]. Evidence-based guidelines are systematically developed statements offering recommendations to healthcare professionals to select the best available, effective interventions. The validity, clarity and clinical applicability of the recommendations should be guaranteed by a systematic identification and appraisal of the available evidence and by the development of the recommendations by a multidisciplinary expert panel [19]. The recommendations of such documents are often not based on the evidence but on opinions of experts or the position of an organisation

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.