Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40355990›Full record

SynthesisActas espanolas de psiquiatria2025

Study of Psychomotor Agitation Constraint Method: A Systematic Review.

Shengnan Zhu, Jing Liu, Aili Cao, Fan Jiang, Rui Wang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Actas espanolas de psiquiatria, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Shengnan ZhuDepartment of General Practice, Minhang Hospital, Fudan University, 201100 Shanghai, China.
Jing LiuDepartment of Nursing, Minhang Hospital, Fudan University, 201100 Shanghai, China.
Aili CaoDepartment of Nursing, Minhang Hospital, Fudan University, 201100 Shanghai, China.
Fan JiangDepartment of Nursing, Minhang Hospital, Fudan University, 201100 Shanghai, China.
Rui WangDepartment of Emergency Intensive Care Unit, Minhang Hospital, Fudan University, 201100 Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPsychomotor agitation is a common psychiatric disorder that often requires physical restraint, consuming significant healthcare resources. Assessing the clinical importance of the correct method of physical restraint for patients with psychomotor agitation presents a challenge for physicians and researchers. This review aims to assess the use of physical restraints in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) and other departments, identifying potential factors influencing their use.

methodsTwo independent researchers conducted a computerized search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for literature related to methods of psychomotor agitation restraint. The review focused on the methods of inhibiting psychomotor agitation in the ICU.

resultsA total of seven papers met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. The restraint rates among patients ranged from 8.7% to 59.07%. Factors influencing patient restraint included gender, marital status, mental and behavioral disorders, emergency referrals, and the use of mechanical ventilation.

conclusionsRestraint is frequently used among patients, particularly among the elderly, males, and those with disorders of consciousness or social relationship issues. This review identifies several factors influencing restraint rates in patients with psychomotor agitation, highlighting the need for further research to develop targeted interventions aimed at reducing the necessity for physical restraints.

Indexed as

Psychomotor AgitationRestraint, PhysicalFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMale

Identifiers

PMID40355990
PMCPMC12069908

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.