ArticleHospital pediatrics2024
Pediatric Physical Restraint Coding in US Hospitals: A 2019 Kids Inpatient Database Study.
Article in Hospital pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for physical restraint use with children and youth in community and inpatient mental health settings in Ontario.Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health · 2026Article
- Restraint care in the pediatric intensive care unit: a qualitative investigation of nurses' perspectives and experiences.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Strategies to Facilitate Intravenous Access for Electroconvulsive Therapy Procedures in Pediatric and Neurodivergent Patients: A Case Series.Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology · 2025Article
- Physical Restraint Use in Hospitalized Patients: A Study of Routinely Collected Health Records Data.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Emergency Department Presentations for Catatonia: A 2019-2021 National Emergency Department Sample Study.Journal of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison PsychiatryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReduction of physical restraint utilization is a goal of high-quality hospital care, but there is little nationally-representative data about physical restraint utilization in hospitalized children in the United States. This study reports the rate of physical restraint coding among hospitalizations for patients aged 1 to 18 years old in the United States and explores associated demographic and diagnostic factors.
methodsThe Kids' Inpatient Database, an all-payors database of community hospital discharges in the United States, was queried for hospitalizations with a diagnosis of physical restraint status in 2019. Logistic regression using patient sociodemographic characteristics was used to characterize factors associated with physical restraint coding.
resultsA coded diagnosis of physical restraint status was present for 8893 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8227-9560) hospitalizations among individuals aged 1 to 18 years old, or 0.63% of hospitalizations. Diagnoses associated with physical restraint varied by age, with mental health diagnoses overall the most frequent in an adjusted model, male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.56; 95% CI: 1.47-1.65), Black race (aOR 1.43; 95% CI: 1.33-1.55), a primary mental health or substance diagnosis (aOR 7.13; 95% CI: 6.42-7.90), Medicare or Medicaid insurance (aOR 1.33; 95% CI: 1.24-1.43), and more severe illness (aOR 2.83; 95% CI: 2.73-2.94) were associated with higher odds of a hospitalization involving a physical restraint code.
conclusionsPhysical restraint coding varied by age, sex, race, region, and disease severity. These results highlight potential disparities in physical restraint utilization, which may have consequences for equity.
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.