Attitudes to Restraint for the Prevention of Falls in Hospital

Abstract

Introduction: Fall prevention measures in hospital are often considered to be restraint and unsuitable for clinical practice. The aim of the study was to explore attitudes to restraint and what are acceptable fall prevention measures in hospital. Methods: A structured questionnaire was completed by 200 subjects (100 patients/relatives and 100 care professionals) in a British hospital. Results: Ninety-nine percent agreed that fall prevention was important. There was 84.5% agreement that restraint is justified to prevent harm and 81.5% disagreement that restraint should never be used if the patient is at risk of falling. Disagreement was stronger among patients/relatives (91 vs. 72%; p = 0.001). Seventy seven percent disagreed that restraint is not acceptable even if discussed with patients and relatives. Significant differences in agreement were identified between patients/relatives and care professionals for the following statements: ‘restraint should always be an option in patients if the patient is at risk of falling’ (82 vs. 45%; p < 0.0001), ‘restraining methods are acceptable at the discretion of care professionals’ (91 vs. 43%; p < 0.0001), ‘restraint is an infringement of personal freedom’ (35 vs. 66%; p < 0.0001) and ‘restraint is necessary if it frees staff to do more clinical work’ (51 vs. 10%; p < 0.0001). A wide range of acceptability was identified for various measures of restraint: observation beds (95%), bed/chair alarms (80%), bed rails (77%), identification bracelets (95%) and risk labels at the head of the bed (75.5%). Direct binding (5.5%) or tranquilliser use (9%) was considered highly unacceptable. Conclusions: When there is a lack of evidence of effectiveness, fall prevention guidelines are formulated on the basis of expert opinion influenced by ethical considerations, cultural attitudes and society’s values. Such information is important to formulate informed fall prevention policies.

Heights of occupied patient beds: a possible risk factor for inpatient falls

“…As we have observed in clinical practice, nurses have been repeatedly and thoroughly educated about the dangers of restraints, and the increased likelihood that a restrained patient will fall. Despite this, Vassallo et al. (2005) found that 84·5% of British healthcare professionals agreed that restraint use is justified to prevent fall‐related injuries.…”

Use of physical restraint in nursing homes: clinical-ethical considerations

“…46 Although the aim is to involve relatives in the decision-making process about their family member, it must be stressed that the ultimate decision is taken by the care team, and they retain full responsibility for their decision. Often, the family is under great stress owing to being confronted with the older person's decline, and they should not be made to feel responsible for the entire process of care as well, since this could give rise to guilt feelings.…”

The Effect of Changing Practice on Fall Prevention in a Rehabilitative Hospital: The Hospital Injury Prevention Study

“…22 The score was validated before this study by looking at its effectiveness on 200 patients on the experimental ward. 23 It had a sensitivity of 92.1%, a specificity of 35.5%, and an overall predictive accuracy of 50.3%. These results were similar to those found by other investigators in stroke patients.…”