Use Of Bedrails Research Articles

Falls as the result of interplay between nurses, patient and the environment: Using text-mining to uncover how and why falls happen

ObjectivesThis study aimed to explore, from the perspectives of nurses, how patients, the environment, and the practice of nurses interact with each other to contribute to patient falls. MethodsA retrospective review of incident reports on patient falls, registered by nurses between 2016 and 2020, was conducted. The incident reports were retrieved from the database set up for the project of the Japan Council for Quality Health Care. The text descriptions of the “background of falls” were extracted verbatim, and analyzed by using a text-mining approach. ResultsA total of 4,176 incident reports on patient falls were analyzed. Of these falls, 79.0% were unwitnessed by nurses, and 8.7% occurred during direct nursing care. Document clustering identified 16 clusters. Four clusters were related to patients, such as the decline in their physiological/cognitive function, a loss of balance, and their use of hypnotic and psychotropic agents. Three clusters were related to nurses, and these included a lack of situation awareness, reliance on patient families, and insufficient implementation of the nursing process. Six clusters were concerned with patients and nurses, including the unproductive use of a bed alarm and call bells, the use of inappropriate footwear, the problematic use of walking aids and bedrails, and insufficient understanding of patients’ activities of daily living. One cluster, chair-related falls, involved both patient and environmental factors. Finally, two clusters involved patient, nurse, and environmental factors, and these falls occurred when patients were bathing/showering or using a bedside commode. ConclusionsFalls were caused by a dynamic interplay between patients, nurses, and the environment. Since many of the patient factors are difficult to modify in a short time, the focus has to be placed on nursing and environmental factors to reduce falls. In particular, improving nurses’ situation awareness is of foremost importance, as it influences their decisions and actions to prevent falls.

177 REDUCTION OF RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES IN AN OLDER PERSON RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY; THE IMPACT ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESIDENT SAFETY

Abstract Background We are a 140 bed long term care residential care facility for older people. We strive to achieve a ‘Restraint Free Environment’ in accordance with Article 40.4 of the Irish Constitution and Articles 14 (liberty and security) and 15 (freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment) of the UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities(1). Health Act 2007, Regulations 2013 defines restrictive practice as ‘the intentional restriction of a person’s voluntary movement or behaviour’. Use of restrictive practices is warranted when there is a real and substantial risk to a person and this risk cannot be addressed by non-restrictive means’ (HIQA, 2019) (2). Methods An extensive review of non pharmacological restrictive practices in the Organisation was undertaken. This included One to One supervision, use of bedrails, Exit Alarm mats and Electronic Monitoring bracelets. Bedrails were replaced for some residents with Safety Wedges and Ultra Low beds. Results Review of restraint interventions showed no clear link to prevention of falls or injuries as a result of restraint. Contrary there was evidence of breach of dignity and privacy for the residents. Based on the review, bedrail use was reduced radically between 2016 and 2021 by 79% (42–9). Falls rate remained consistent approximately 3.6–3.2 per 1,000 Occupied Bed Days. Exit Alarm mats, Electronic Monitoring bracelets and One to One supervision was discontinued. These were replaced with direct observation and two hourly anticipation of needs. Cost saving on One to One estimated to have been €25,000 in 2016 alone. Clear care planning of the resident’s needs are core. Conclusion We have demonstrated that we could successfully reduce restrictive practices, thus respecting Human Rights, with no compromise to resident safety.

Factors influencing patient falls in a private hospital group in the Cape Metropole of the Western Cape

BackgroundThe fall rate of patients in hospitals is a worldwide concern due to the impact falls have on patients, the family or relatives, as well as the healthcare setting. Factors influencing patient falls are categorised as intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic factors refers to physical conditions and the extrinsic factors include the environment of the patient, nursing staffing levels and skill mix.AimThe study aimed to determine the factors that influence patient falls.SettingA private hospital group in the Cape Metropole of the Western Cape.MethodsA quantitative retrospective descriptive research approach was used by analysing 134 records of patients that have fallen from October 2016 to February 2018. Data was collected using a data extraction sheet and analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).ResultsIntrinsic factors contributing to patient falls includedthe patient’s age, hypertension, co-morbidities and the use of benzodiazepines as a sedative. Extrinsic factors were the incorrect use of bed rails and the skill mix of the staff. In over half of the cases (n = 68; 50.7%), risk assessments were not performed according to the protocol. Only 5 (3.7%) patients sustained major injuries due to the falls. However, the risk of more severe falls increased 2.4 times with the lack of risk assessment.ConclusionThe lack of accurate and consistent patient fall risk assessments, use of benzodiazepines as a sedative and the staff skill mix were contributors to the fall rate in these hospitals.

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.

Death due to physical restraint in healthcare institutions

Physical restraint is frequently used in healthcare institutions, usually in situations where the safety of the person (e.g. fall risk) or that of others (e.g. aggressive behaviour) is compromised, or where essential medical treatment is at stake.The implementation has a major impact with possible psychological consequences, physical injury and even fatal outcomes. In this retrospective study, fifteen deaths due to physical restraint are described. These have been investigated by the Forensic Medicine departments of UZ Leuven (1998 - 2018) and UZ Antwerpen (1999 - 2018). Death was caused by mechanical suffocation in all instances, mainly as a result of inadequate use of bedrails or belt restraint. These avoidable deaths are an urgent plea for a cautious and careful policy on physical restraint. Institutional guidelines and (further) training of health care personnel are of utmost importance. Central aspects are multidisciplinarity (deliberate decision-making), treatment (provoking factors), reticence (search for alternatives), proportionality (least intrusive method), due care (technical implementation), safety (increased supervision), temporality (re-evaluation of moment and duration), registration (accountability and liability) and communication (with all involved).

The Attitudes Towards the Use of Restraint and Restrictive Intervention Amongst Healthcare Staff on Acute Medical and Frailty Wards—A Brief Literature Review

Restraint in modern non-psychiatric-based healthcare is often regarded as a rare occurrence. It is deemed to be used as a last resort to prevent patients from directly harming themselves. However, techniques are used in modern day practice which are considered direct and indirect restraints with the justification of maintaining patient safety, but they are often not classified as “restraints”. Examples of these include the use of bed rails or tables to prevent patients from “wandering” and to reduce the risk of falls and injuries. More indirect techniques would involve passive interactions with patients or leaving mobility aids out of reach. Staff subconsciously restrain patients and reduce their liberties despite agreeing that patient autonomy should be upheld—a necessary evil to maintain a duty of care. Whilst the use of restraints is often justified to ensure patient care and prevent injury, it is not without consequence. There are physical and psychological health risks such as pressure sores from the inability to mobilise, or the brewing of anger and frustration when denied access to everyday actions. The reasons why restraints are used, whilst stemming from maintaining patient safety, are often due to low staffing levels and the inability to constantly watch at-risk patients due to a large workload. Inadequate training is another factor; by improving education in direct and indirect restraint and providing alternative methods, more ethical decisions and positive outcomes can be implemented. Healthcare professionals are reluctant to use restraint but often conduct it without realising it; assessing their understanding of restraint and providing education to raise awareness of the consequences of direct and indirect methods would result in positive steps toward reducing their use at the same time as looking to provide alternatives to uphold patient care whilst maintaining their dignity and liberty.

Effectiveness of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults: a systematic review.

Falls are a major problem today affecting adults of any age, but the elderly are a population that is more susceptible to falls. Falls are the leading cause of injury or death among older adults. Hospitalized older people are particularly vulnerable to falls. Falls cause direct injuries (minor injuries, severe wounds of the soft tissues and bone fractures) to patients and increased length of stay. The prevention of falls is commonly considered an indicator of the quality of care. Therefore, health institutions and professionals treat the identification and implementation of strategies to prevent or minimize their effects as a high priority. Fall prevention interventions involving physical restraints are still common and considered a primary preventative measure, despite controversy in their use. One of the most frequently used restraint interventions is bedrails. The question of the effectiveness of bedrails in preventing falls cuts across all societies and cultures and has with significant implications for the clinical practice of nurses. The objective of this review was to identify the effectiveness of the use of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults when compared with no use of bedrails or any type of physical restraints. The current review considered studies that included hospitalized adults (female and male), 65 years and over with any clinical condition in a non-intensive care unit (ICU). The current review considered studies that evaluated the use of bedrails as a restraint to prevent falls among older adults in non-ICUs compared to no use of bedrails or any type of physical restraints, for example, bedrails versus no bedrails, and bedrails versus no wrist or ankle ties. The current review considered any randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In the absence of RCTs, other research designs such as non-RCTs, before and after studies, cohort studies, case-control studies, descriptive studies, case series/reports and expert-opinion were considered. The current review considered studies that included primary outcomes (number of patients who fell or the number of falls per patient) and secondary outcomes (number of head trauma, bone fractures or soft tissue injuries). The search strategy aimed to find both published and unpublished articles. A three-step search strategy was utilized in 13 databases. Articles published in Portuguese, English and Spanish beginning from 1980 were considered for inclusion. Assessment of methodological quality was not conducted as no articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction and synthesis was not performed, because no articles were included in this systematic review. The search identified a total of 875 potentially relevant articles. Sixteen articles were identified through the reference lists of all identified articles. One hundred and thirteen full-text papers were assessed by two independent reviewers to determine eligibility. However, 11 articles were not found (despite all the efforts), and 102 articles did not meet the inclusion criteria. There is no scientific evidence comparing the use of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults to no use of bedrails or any type of physical restraints.

Falls in hospitalized geriatric psychiatry patients: high incidence, but only a few fractures.

Fall rates from 3.2 to 17.1 falls per 1,000 hospital days in geriatric psychiatry facilities have been reported to date. Up to 5% of the falls result in severe injuries, but data concerning medical consequences are scare. This brief report presents a retrospective analysis of one year fall protocols from a geriatric psychiatry department focusing on consequences of falls. Fall-induced injuries were rated in four categories: no injuries, mild injuries (contusions, hematomas, abrasions), moderate injuries (lacerations, dislocations), and severe injuries (fractures, cerebral hemorrhages). In total, 510 falls were registered during the study period, indicating a fall rate of 17.7 falls per 1,000 hospital days. Overall, 375 falls (73.5%) resulted in no injuries, 67 (13.1%) resulted in mild injuries, 59 (11.6%) resulted in moderate injuries, and only 9 (1.8%) falls led to severe injuries (fractures and cerebral hemorrhages). These results indicate a quite high fall rate in our sample of hospitalized geriatric psychiatry patients with only a relatively small number of severe injuries resulting from the falls. These results raise the question about the use of physical restraints and the use of bedrails in geriatric patients to prevent falls as the medical implications of falls may be less problematic than previously thought.

Effectiveness of the use of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults: a systematic review protocol

REVIEW QUESTION / OBJECTIVE The objective of this review is to identify the effectiveness of the use of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults when compared with no use of bedrails or any type of physical restraints. More specifically, the review will focus on the following questions: What is the effectiveness of the use of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults when compared with no use of bedrails? What is the effectiveness of the use of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults when compared with no use of physical restraints? INCLUSION CRITERIA Types of participants The quantitative component of this review will consider studies that include hospitalized adults (female and male), 65 years and over with any clinical condition in a non-intensive care unit. Types of intervention(s)/phenomena of interest The quantitative component of the review will consider studies that evaluate the use of bedrails as a restraint to prevent falls among older adults in non-intensive care units compared to no use of bedrails or any type of physical restraints, for example: bedrails versus no bedrails, and bedrails versus no wrist or ankle ties. Types of outcomes This review will consider studies that include the following outcome measures: Primary outcomes – Number of patients who fall or the number of falls per patient. Secondary outcomes – Number of head trauma, bone fractures or soft tissue injuries.

Effectiveness of the use of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults: a systematic review protocol

Effectiveness of the use of bedrails in preventing falls among hospitalized older adults: a systematic review protocol

Practice question.

Nurses are often faced with the complex challenge of preventing pressure ulcers and patient falls. Risk assessment and providing the right pressure-redistributing mattresses combined with correct use of bed rails is essential.

Prevalence and predictors of bedrail use in an acute hospital.

to determine the prevalence and predictors of bedrail use in an acute hospital. overnight survey in a University teaching hospital. Three-hundred and twenty-seven beds and patients in 14 wards. data were collected on bedrail use and on the bed system, ward and patient characteristics. Medical, nursing and physical therapy notes were examined and the night and day nurses and, if necessary, the doctors and therapists caring for the patient interviewed to determine patients' diagnoses, functional and cognitive status. there were 133 (40.7%) beds with one or more raised rails. Independent predictors of bedrail use were use of electric profiling beds, confusion, reduced alertness and any difficulty with transferring from bed. The most common reported indication for bedrail use was 'to prevent rolling out of bed' (59%); 'to prevent getting out of bed' was recorded in 11% of cases. Use of bedrails was judged inappropriate in 27/133 (20.3%) patients and in 14/43 (32.6%) patients with abnormal mental status; misuse was particularly common in those with confusion or agitation [13/34 (38.2%)]. Failure to use bedrails was potentially inappropriate in 32/194 (16.5%) of those without bedrails. this study using individual patient data shows that the use of electric profiling beds, abnormal mental states and difficulty transferring from bed are the main predictors of bedrail use in acute hospitals. Inappropriate use of bedrails is common in those with cognitive impairment or with agitation.

Practical and ethical use of bed rails

Residents must be provided with bed rails that are suitable for their individual needs. Cheryl Keeling explains how managers can ensure the care home is following the correct protocols

Which bed designs and patient characteristics increase bed rail use?

the design and use of bed rails has been contentious since the 1950s with benefits including safety, mobility support and access to bed controls and disadvantages associated with entrapment and restraint. to explore which bed designs and patient characteristics (mobility, cognitive status and age) influence the likelihood of rails being used on UK medical wards. the use of rails was surveyed overnight at 18 hospitals between July 2010 and February 2011. data were collected on 2,219 beds with 1,799 included (occupied). Eighty-six percent had rails attached; 52% had raised rails (42% had all raised). Adjusted logistic regression results suggest a significantly increased likelihood of rail use for (i) electric profiling beds and ultra low beds; (ii) >80 years; (iii) described as having any level of confusion or mobility impairment. These variables together explained 55% of the variance in rail use. The most frequently mentioned reason for raising rails was 'to prevent falls from the bed' (61%) especially for patients described as confused (75%). there were indications that rails were being used inappropriately (as a restraint) for both confused patients and those needing assistance to mobilise.

Psychometric properties of the Swiss version of the Nursing Home Survey on Patient Safety Culture

The Nursing Home Survey on Patient Safety Culture (NHSPSC) was specifically developed for nursing homes to assess a facility’s safety climate and it consists of 12 dimensions. After its pilot testing, however, no further psychometric analyses were performed on the instrument. For this study of safety climate in Swiss nursing home units, the NHSPSC was linguistically adapted to the Swiss context and to address the unit as well as facility level, with the aim of testing aspects of the validity and reliability of the Swiss version before its use in Swiss nursing home units. Psychometric analyses were performed on data from 367 nursing personnel from nine nursing homes in the German-speaking part of Switzerland (response rate=66%), and content validity (CVI) examined. The statistical influence of unit membership on respondents’ answers, and on their agreement concerning their units’ safety climate, was tested using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the rWG(J) interrater agreement index. A multilevel exploratory factor analysis (MEFA) with oblimin rotation was applied to examine the questionnaire’s dimensionality. Cronbach’s alpha and Raykov’s rho were calculated to assess factor reliability. The relationship of safety climate dimensions with clinical outcomes was explored. Expert feedback confirmed the relevance of the instrument’s items (CVI=0.93). Personnel showed strong agreement in their perceptions in three dimensions of the questionnaire. ICCs supported a multilevel analysis. MEFA produced nine factors at the within-level (in comparison to 12 in the original version) and two factors at the between-level with satisfactory fit statistics. Raykov’s Rho for the single level factors ranged between 0.67 and 0.86. Some safety climate dimensions show moderate, but non-significant correlations with the use of bedrails, physical restraint use, and fall-related injuries. The Swiss version of the NHSPSC needs further refinement and testing before its use can be recommended in Swiss nursing homes: its dimensionality needs further clarification, particularly to distinguish items addressing the unit-level safety climate from those at the facility level.

Belt Restraint Reduction in Nursing Homes: Effects of a Multicomponent Intervention Program

To test the effects of a multicomponent intervention program to reduce the use of belt restraints in psychogeriatric nursing homes. A quasi-experimental longitudinal design. Study duration was 8 months. Twenty-six psychogeriatric nursing home wards in 13 Dutch nursing homes were assigned to intervention or control groups. Seven hundred fourteen residents were selected for participation. Legal representatives of 520 residents agreed on participation; complete data are available for 405 residents. The intervention program included four major components: promotion of institutional policy change that discourages use of belt restraint, nursing home staff education, consultation by a nurse specialist aimed at nursing home staff, and availability of alternative interventions. The primary outcome measure was the frequency of belt restraint use. Secondary outcomes included other types of physical restraints, psychoactive drug use, falls, and fall-related injuries. These data were collected at baseline and after 4 and 8 months. A trained, blinded observer measured the use of belts and other physical restraints types four times during a 24-hour period. The intervention resulted in a 50% decrease in belt use (odds ratio = 0.48, 95% confidence interval = 0.28-0.81; P = .005). No increase occurred in the use of other types of restraints. No marked differences between the groups were found regarding psychoactive drugs, falls, and fall-related injuries. A multicomponent intervention program led to a substantial reduction in use of belts, full-enclosure bedrails, and sleep suits without increasing the use of other physical restraints, psychoactive drugs, or falls and fall-related injuries.

Fall Risk Assessment in Geriatric-Psychiatric Inpatients to Lower Events (FRAGILE)

The objectives of this retrospective case-control study were to identify risk factors of falls in geriatric-psychiatric inpatients and develop a screening tool to accurately predict falls. The study sample consisted of 225 geriatric-psychiatric inpatients at a Midwestern referral facility. The sample included 136 inpatients who fell and a random stratified sample of 89 inpatients who did not fall. Data collected included age, gender, activities of daily living, and nursing parameters such as bathing assistance, bed height, use of bed rails, one-on-one observation, fall warning system, Conley Scale fall risk assessment, medical diagnosis, and medications. History of falls, impaired judgment, impaired gait, dizziness, delusions, delirium, chronic use of sedative or antipsychotic agents, and anticholinergic urinary bladder medications significantly increased fall risk. Alzheimer's disease, acute use of sedative or anti-psychotic agents, and depression reduced fall risk. A falls risk tool, Fall Risk Assessment in Geriatric-psychiatric Inpatients to Lower Events (FRAGILE), was developed for assessment and risk stratification with new diagnoses or medications.

The Use of Physical Restraints in Home Care in the Netherlands

To gain more knowledge of the application of physical restraints to restrict, restrain, or prevent movement by elderly people living at home. Survey. Nursing staff in Dutch home care. One hundred fifty-seven nursing staff in home care (registered nurses and certified nursing assistants) from a randomly selected and nationally representative panel returned the questionnaire (response rate 72%). A structured questionnaire on the use of physical restraints. Four of every five nursing staff members have applied physical restraints. The use of bed rails, putting the client in a deep chair or using a chair with a table, and locking doors to prevent wandering were most frequently applied, often at the request of the client or his or her family. Protection of the client is the reason most frequently given for these actions. Almost all respondents (94%) know of no alternatives, nor does consensus exist on what is considered to be a physical restraint. Guidelines are necessary regarding the course of action to be taken when a client is in danger of hurting him- or herself. Further education on and due consideration of the use of physical restraints in home care are also required.

Effects of Potentially Inappropriate Psychoactive Medications on Falls in US Nursing Home Residents†

Use of potentially inappropriate psychoactive medications (PIPMs) poses a serious threat of falls among elderly nursing home residents. This study was conducted to identify the effects of PIPMs on falls compared with use of other psychoactive medications among elderly US nursing home residents. The 2004 National Nursing Home Survey (NNHS) was used as the data source. Logistic regression was performed to ascertain the relationship between elderly residents who fell in the past 30 days and the use of PIPMs as per Beers' criteria in the presence of other risk factors. The data analysis was performed using SAS version 9.1. The 2004 NNHS database includes data concerning 11 940 elderly residents in 1174 facilities. The mean age of the elderly residents was 84.1 +/- 7.97 years. Residents receiving PIPMs were at an increased risk of falling compared with those receiving other psychoactive medications (odds ratio [OR] = 0.830, p = 0.028) as well as compared with residents not receiving psychoactive medications (OR = 0.624, p < 0.001). In addition, residents' fall risk increased with an increase in the number of impaired activities of daily living (OR = 1.160, p < 0.001). Presence of depressed mood indicators was also identified as an important risk factor (OR = 1.256, p < 0.001). Use of bedrails had a protective effect on residents' fall risk (OR = 0.714, p < 0.001). Demographic factors such as male sex and White race were also significant fall-risk factors. Prevention of falls in elderly nursing home residents remains a challenge. Despite the recommendations of prescribing guidelines, PIPMs are still prescribed to elderly nursing home residents. Access to appropriate psychoactive medications should be ensured. Residents with the identified risk factors should be closely monitored. Further research should be pursued to evaluate the impact on falls of potentially inappropriate medications in other therapeutic categories.

An audit of bedrail use and implications for practice

Bedrails are used extensively in both the hospital and community care settings to protect vulnerable people from falling out of bed. However, there is evidence of indiscriminate bedrail use and some inadvertent use of bedrails as a form of restraint, which in turn may compromise patient safety, dignity and autonomy. This article describes a night-time bedrail audit undertaken in one integrated NHS trust to determine the numbers and types of bedrails in use, the patient demographic, locations where bedrails were used and, importantly, why staff decided to use them. The information collected was used to inform local policy development and improve practice. The implications of the audit findings for practice are discussed, and a new decision aid for the use of bedrails is presented.