Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39108348›Full record

SynthesisF1000Research2023

An integrative review on physical restraint in adult critical care unit.

Janisha Kavumpurath, Kulanthayan Kc Mani, Fatma Refaat, Navin Devaraj, Aneesa Abdul Rashid, Noor Airini Ibrahim

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in F1000Research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

6 authors.

Janisha KavumpurathDepartment of Nursing, University Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0001-9585-7880
Kulanthayan Kc ManiDepartment of Community Health, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.
Fatma RefaatDepartment of Nursing, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
Navin DevarajDepartment of Family Medicine, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.
Aneesa Abdul RashidDepartment of Family Medicine, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-7944-1364
Noor Airini IbrahimFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Physical restraints (PRs) are frequently used in adult critical care units to protect staff and prevent self-harm, despite the fact that they represent significant safety risks. Restraint complications may have an impact on the patient's long- and short-term outcomes. This integrative review aimed to meticulously evaluate existing evidence pertaining to physical restraint practices in adult critical care settings. The review was specifically geared towards examining the prevalence of PR, identifying influential factors, elucidating the role of nurses in PR implementation, exploring nurses' experiences in caring for patients under restraint, and scrutinizing the complications associated with PR application. Method: This integrative review included the studies published between January 2009 and December 2019 and the literature search was conducted in July 2020. The databases searched included EBSCOhost, Ovid, ProQuest, PubMed, Wiley Online Library, SCOPUS, and ScienceDirect. The keywords included in the search were restraint, critical care, intensive care, ICU, mechanical ventilation, intubation, nursing, and experience. A checklist based on the CASP checklist and the JBI Critical Appraisal Tool was used to assess the methodological quality. Results: The findings were evaluated and summarized into seven key topics after twenty-one publications were found to be evaluated. i) High prevalence of PR application in adult critical care unit; ii) determinants of PR applications; iii) types of PR in adult critical care units; iv) decision maker of PR; v) moral and ethical dilemma in PR application; vi) awareness and guidelines for PR applications; vii) common complications and use of sedation, analgesics, antipsychotic drugs in PR application. Conclusion: The number of days PR is used is related to the risk of an adverse event. In order to standardize nursing practice, ICU nurses require greater training on the ideas of PR use. Evidence-based recommendations will assist critical care nurses in making the best judgments possible concerning the use of PR.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsRestraint, PhysicalAdultCritical CareHumanscritical careimmobilizationmechanical ventilationphysical restraint

Identifiers

PMID39108348
PMCPMC11301127

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.