ArticleAustralasian journal on ageing2020
A missed opportunity to improve practice around the use of restraints and consent in residential aged care: Limitations of the Quality of Care Amendment (Minimising the Use of Restraints) Principles 2019.
Article in Australasian journal on ageing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Safewards Programme to Reduce Restrictive Practices in Residential Aged Care: Protocol for a Pilot and Feasibility Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Single-site employment (multiple jobholding) in residential aged care: A response to COVID-19 with wider workforce lessons.Australasian journal on ageing · 2022Article
- Human Rights and Empowerment in Aged Care: Restraint, Consent and Dying with Dignity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- A missed opportunity to improve practice around the use of restraints and consent in residential aged care: Limitations of the Quality of Care Amendment (Minimising the Use of Restraints) Principles 2019.Australasian journal on ageing · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the meaning and potential role of new Quality of Care Amendment (Minimising the Use of Restraints) Principles 2019, (Principles) which amend Quality of Care Principles 2014 in improving practice around physical and chemical restraint.
methodsWe examined both Principles and accompanying Explanatory Statement in light of best practices around consent and use of chemical and physical restraint.
resultsThe chemical restraint definition is problematic by exclusion of medications for treating mental disorders, physical illness or physical conditions, which is not considered restraint. Inexplicably, physical restraint requirements are more rigorous than chemical restraint requirements, where assessment is optional, and consent sometimes obtained, after use, and from the person's "representative," rather than the person first, followed by their proxy decision-maker.
conclusionsAlthough a start in promoting best practice around physical restraint, the Principles do not address the status quo of poor practice around chemical restraint and may instead codify it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.