Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37387268›Full record

ArticleDementia (London, England)2023

Discussing physical restrictions in care plan meetings between family members of residents with dementia and nursing home staff.

Jenny Paananen, Camilla Lindholm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dementia (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Jenny PaananenDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-1653-7967
Camilla LindholmFaculty of Information Technology and Communication Sciences, Tampere University, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In long-term dementia care, caregivers face a dilemma. On the one hand, they need to respect the residents' right to self-determination, but on the other hand, they sometimes rely on physical restraints to deal with potential violence and self-destructive behavior. The issue of self determination is further complicated by residents often depending on family members as advocates in decision-making. In this article, we examine 15 care plan meetings to identify the professional practices of discussing the physical restrictions posed to residents with severe dementia. Our method is conversation analysis. Our analysis demonstrates that staff members' practices involve informing, accounting, and agreeing on the goals rather than on the methods of physical restraining. Staff members tend to first inform family members about the principles of restraining and then account for the use of restraints. Accounts highlight the problems that can be avoided and the benefits that can be achieved by limiting residents' actions. Consequently, the family members' role in the discussion is to accept the decision that has already been approved by authorities. As the staff members highlight the aim of protecting the well-being of the resident, the family members tend to respond with overt agreement and even promote the use of restraints. Current negotiation practices provide insufficient opportunities for family members to advocate for residents. Therefore, we recommend involving family members in decision-making about restraining at an earlier stage, adjusting the protocol in care plan meetings, and engaging the family in minimizing and preventing restraints. In general, staff members should pay more attention to the residents' experiences and the family members' lifeworld knowledge of the residents.

Indexed as

DementiaNursing StaffFamilyHumansNursing HomesPersonal Autonomycare plancare plan meetingdecision-makingdementiafamily membersinteractionnursing homerestraining

Identifiers

PMID37387268
PMCPMC10521163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.