ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2025
Development and Validation of Clinical Practice Standards for Physical Restraint in Hospitalized Patients: A Multi-Method Study.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Construction and Multidimensional Verification of Clinical Practice Standards for Physical Restraint: A Four-Year Retrospective Quality Improvement Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Physical restraint is commonly used in clinical settings to ensure patient safety, yet its application lacks standardization and may lead to adverse physical and psychological effects. There remains a significant gap in evidence-based guidelines tailored to nurses practices. Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate clinical practice standards for physical restraint in hospitalized patients from a nurses staff perspective and to evaluate their impact on nurses knowledge, attitude, behaviors, and patient outcomes. Methods: A multi-stage design was employed, including a cross-sectional survey, semi-structured interviews, a Delphi expert consultation, and a controlled trial. The study involved 202 nurses and 100 patients from a tertiary hospital in Chongqing, China. The intervention group received standardized training based on the newly developed restraint criteria, while the control group followed routine protocols. Results: The expert consultation achieved high consensus (Cr = 0.85). Post-training, the intervention group showed significant improvements in knowledge, attitude, and practice scores (P < 0.05), and a reduction in restraint use and duration (P < 0.05). Although adverse event rates decreased in the intervention group, the differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: The developed standards effectively enhance nurses practice, reduce unnecessary restraint use, and maintain patient safety, supporting their integration into clinical nurses management.
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.