Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27871314›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2016

A mixed-methods systematic review protocol to examine the use of physical restraint with critically ill adults and strategies for minimizing their use.

Louise Rose, Craig Dale, Orla M Smith, Lisa Burry, Glenn Enright, Dean Fergusson, Samir Sinha, Lesley Wiesenfeld, Tasnim Sinuff, Sangeeta Mehta

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05180552 (The HEALiX Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05180552 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2028, after this paper: background citation

The HEALiX Trial: Comparing the Efficacy of the HEALiX Device With Wrist Restraints in a Critical Care Setting

TypeinterventionalSponsorMilton S. Hershey Medical CenterRan2028 to 2030Enrolled0ConditionsSafety Issues, Device Dislodgement, Device Intolerance, Device IneffectiveArmsHEALiX is an alternative restraint patient safety device, soft wrist restraints
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Factors affecting nursing practice of patient physical restraint among nurses.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Ten tips for ICU sedation.Intensive care medicine · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Louise RoseDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, M4N 3M5, Canada. louise.rose@utoronto.ca.
Craig DaleLawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, 155 College St., Toronto, M5T 1P8, Canada.
Orla M SmithDepartment of Critical Care, Nursing/Clinical Research, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond St, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Lisa BurryLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, 144 College St, Toronto, M5S 3M2, Canada.
Glenn EnrightLawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, 155 College St., Toronto, M5T 1P8, Canada.
Dean FergussonClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 500 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8L6, Canada.
Samir SinhaMount Sinai Hospital, 600 University Ave, Toronto, M5G 1X5, Canada.
Lesley WiesenfeldMount Sinai Hospital, 600 University Ave, Toronto, M5G 1X5, Canada.
Tasnim SinuffDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Sangeeta MehtaMount Sinai Hospital, 600 University Ave, Toronto, M5G 1X5, Canada.
Mount Sinai Hospital · CAUniversity of Toronto · CACentre for Family Medicine · CAHealth Sciences Centre · CASt. Michael's Hospital · CAToronto East General Hospital · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCritically ill patients frequently experience severe agitation placing them at risk of harm. Physical restraint is common in intensive care units (ICUs) for clinician concerns about safety. However, physical restraint may not prevent medical device removal and has been associated with negative physical and psychological consequences. While professional society guidelines, legislation, and accreditation standards recommend physical restraint minimization, guidelines for critically ill patients are over a decade old, with recommendations that are non-specific. Our systematic review will synthesize evidence on physical restraint in critically ill adults with the primary objective of identifying effective minimization strategies.

methodsTwo authors will independently search from inception to July 2016 the following: Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, Joanna Briggs Institute, grey literature, professional society websites, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We will include quantitative and qualitative study designs, clinical practice guidelines, policy documents, and professional society recommendations relevant to physical restraint of critically ill adults. Authors will independently perform data extraction in duplicate and complete risk of bias and quality assessment using recommended tools. We will assess evidence quality for quantitative studies using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and for qualitative studies using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) guidelines. Outcomes of interest include (1) efficacy/effectiveness of physical restraint minimization strategies; (2) adverse events (unintentional device removal, psychological impact, physical injury) and associated benefits including harm prevention; (3) ICU outcomes (ventilation duration, length of stay, and mortality); (4) prevalence, incidence, patterns of use including patient and treatment characteristics and chemical restraint; (5) barriers and facilitators to minimization; (6) patient, family, and healthcare professional perspectives; (7) professional society-endorsed recommendations; and (8) evidence gaps and research priorities. DISCUSSION: We will use our systematic review findings to produce updated guidelines on physical restraint use for critically ill adults and to develop a professional society-endorsed position statement. This will foster patient and clinician safety by providing clinicians, administrators, and policy makers with a tool to promote minimal and safe use of physical restraint for critically ill adults. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015027860.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessPatient Outcome AssessmentHumansIntensive Care UnitsLength of StayQualitative ResearchRespiration, ArtificialRestraint, PhysicalSystematic Reviews as TopicTime FactorsIntensive careMechanical ventilationPatient safetyPhysical restraintSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID27871314
PMCPMC5117692
OpenAlexW2551671123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.