ArticleEmergency medicine Australasia : EMA2025
Comparison of mechanical restraint use in a metropolitan ED after system change: A before and after analysis.
Article in Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrior to 2020, Nepean ED had high rates of restraint of mental health (MH) patients compared to peer hospitals. Restraint can cause emotional and physical trauma to patients and staff and should be used as seldom as possible. The ED undertook a project to reduce the number and duration of restraint episodes, involving telepsychiatry, culture change, staff education, increasing use of sedation and bedside engagement in de-escalation techniques.
objectivesTo compare the differences in mechanical restraint episodes between 2019 and 2021 calendar years, after a year of change implementation in 2020.
methodA single-centre retrospective cohort analysis of patients requiring mechanical restraint for MH complaints in 2019 and 2021 was conducted. Presentations of all MH patients were identified from the electronic medical record. Episodes of restraint were identified from the ED restraint register, and a file review of the electronic medical record was conducted to obtain data.
resultsIn 2021, there was a 11.5% increase in total MH presentations (2705 vs 3056). There was a decrease in the proportion of MH patients experiencing restraint from 8.8% to 6.3% (difference 2.5%; 95% CI 1.1%-3.8%). Mean duration of restraint decreased from 385 to 229 min (difference 145; 95% CI 93.3-196.2) and use of sedation in restrained patients increased from 58.6% to 72.9% (difference 16%; 95% CI 6.8%-25.1%).
conclusionAfter a year of change implementation, there was a reduction in the use of restraints and an increase in the use of sedation in 2021 when compared to 2019.
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.