Association between patient primary language, physical restraints, and intramuscular sedation in the emergency department.

backgroundDespite the importance of effective communication during verbal de-escalation, research regarding patient primary language during management of agitation symptoms is limited. We evaluated associations between patient primary language and use of physical restraints and intramuscular (IM) sedation in the emergency department (ED).

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort analysis evaluating physical restraint and IM sedation characteristics using electronic medical records from 13 EDs affiliated with a large regional health care network located in the northeast United States. Data were collected for ED visits from 2013 to 2023 for all adult patients ages 18 and older. We performed logistic regression models using the presence of physical restraint and IM sedation orders as primary outcomes, adjusting for patient primary language, sex assigned at birth, age, race and ethnicity, and chief complaints.

resultsIn our analysis of 3,406,474 visits, 3,086,512 included English speakers, 250,912 included Spanish speakers, 9,057 included Portuguese speakers, 6,616 included Arabic speakers, 6,425 included Italian speakers, 39,303 included other language speakers, and 7,649 included unknown language speakers; 18,546 visits included use of physical restraints and 48,277 visits included use of IM sedation. After demographic and clinical characteristics were adjusted for, visits with Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking patients had a reduced likelihood of physical restraints and IM sedation compared to English speakers, with adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) of 0.70 (0.65-0.76) and 0.82 (0.79-0.87) for Spanish speakers and 0.39 (0.20-0.68) and 0.84 (0.66-1.05) for Portuguese speakers, respectively.

conclusionsED visits with Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking patients were found to have lower odds of physical restraints and IM sedation, while Arabic, Italian, other, and unknown language-speaking patients were found to have higher odds. Factors contributing to linguistic differences in physical restraint and IM sedation use, such as cultural interpretations of behavior, quality of clinical interactions, and patient-clinician communication strategies, merit further investigation.