Why are physical restraints still in use? A qualitative descriptive study from Chinese critical care clinicians’ perspectives
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
To understand why critical care clinicians still implement physical restraints, to prevent unplanned extubation and to explore the driving factors influencing the decision-making of physical restraints use. Design
A qualitative descriptive design was used. The data were collected through one-to-one, semistructured interviews and analysed through the framework of thematic analysis. Participants and setting
The study was conducted from December 2019 to May 2020 at one general intensive care unit (ICU) and one emergency ICU in a general tertiary hospital with 3200 beds in Hangzhou, China. The sampling strategy was combined maximum variation sampling and criterion sampling. Results
A total of 14 clinicians participated in the study. The reason why critical care clinicians implemented physical restraints to prevent unplanned extubation was that the tense healthcare climate was caused by family members’ rejection of mismatched expectations. As unplanned extubation was highly likely to create medical disputes, hospitals placed excessive emphasis on unplanned extubation, which resulted in a lack of analysis of the cause of unplanned extubation and strict measures for dealing with unplanned extubation. The shortage of nursing human resources, unsuitable ward environments, intensivists’ attitudes, timely extubation for intensivists, nurse experiences and the patient’s possibility of unplanned extubation all contributed to the decision-making resulting in the use of physical restraints. Conclusions
Although nurses played a crucial role in the decision-making process of using physical restraints, changing the healthcare climate and the hospital management mode for unplanned extubation are fundamental measures to reduce physical restraints use.
SUBMITTER: Cui N
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8572407 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Aim: The aim of the study was to explore the perception and practice of physical restraints used by critical care nurses. Design: A qualitative descriptive design was used. Method: From December 2019 to May 2020, a one-to-one, semi-structured in-depth interview with 10 critical care nurses from two intensive care units in a tertiary general hospital with 3,200 beds in China was conducted using the method of purposeful sampling. The data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Findings: The perception of physical restraints among critical care nurses was that patient comfort can be sacrificed for patient safety. Physical restraints protected patient safety by preventing patients from unplanned extubation but influenced patient comfort. Physical restraints were common practice of critical care nurses. Relative physical restraints provided patients with more freedom of movement and rationalization of physical restraints which were the practical strategies. Conclusion: The study identified problems in critical care nurses' perception and practice on physical restraints. Critical care nurses are confident that physical restraints can protect patient safety, and the influence of physical restraints on patient comfort is just like the side effect. Although physical restraints were common practice, critical care nurses still faced dilemmas in the implementation of physical restraints. Relative physical restraints and rationalization of physical restraints help critical care nurses cope with the "bad feelings," which may also be the cause of unplanned extubation. It is necessary for the adaptation of clinical practice guidelines about physical restraints for critically ill patients in the Chinese context, to change the perception and practice of critical care nurses and deliver safe and high-quality patient care.
| S-EPMC8342939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor older trauma patients who sustain trauma in rural areas, the risk of adverse outcomes associated with advancing age, is compounded by the challenges encountered in rural healthcare such as geographic isolation, lack of resources, and accessibility. Little is known of the experience and challenges faced by rural clinicians who manage trauma in older adults. An understanding of stakeholders' views is paramount to the effective development and implementation of a trauma system inclusive of rural communities. The aim of this descriptive qualitative study was to explore the perspectives of clinicians who provide care to older trauma patients in rural settings.MethodWe conducted semi-structured interviews of health professionals (medical doctors, nurses, paramedics, and allied health professionals) who provide care to older trauma patients in rural Queensland, Australia. A thematic analysis consisting of both inductive and deductive coding approaches, was used to identify and develop themes from interviews.ResultsFifteen participants took part in the interviews. Three key themes were identified: enablers of trauma care, barriers, and changes to improve trauma care of older people. The resilience of rural residents, and breadth of experience of rural clinicians were strengths identified by participants. The perceived systemic lack of resources, both material and in the workforce, and fragmentation of the health system across the state were barriers to the provision of trauma care to older rural patients. Some changes proposed by participants included tailored education programs that would be taught in rural centres, a dedicated case coordinator for older trauma patients from rural areas, and a centralised system designed to streamline the management of older trauma patients coming from rural regions.ConclusionsRural clinicians are important stakeholders who should be included in discussions on adapting trauma guidelines to the rural setting. In this study, participants formulated pertinent and concrete recommendations that should be weighed against the current evidence, and tested in rural centres.
| S-EPMC10308762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Suicide is a serious public health problem, ranked amongst the leading causes of death worldwide. There are no official data on self-harm and suicide in Pakistan; both are illegal acts, and are socially and religiously condemned. This study explored the views of clinicians, including general practitioners (GPs) and hospital physicians (HPs) on self-harm, about their management of people who self-harm and what interventions might be appropriate in Pakistan. Methods: This qualitative study, generating data using semi-structured interviews, was nested within a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) of a psychosocial intervention for people following self-harm. Clinicians (n = 18) with experience of treating people who self-harm were recruited from public hospitals and general practices. Results: Face-to-face interviews were conducted in Urdu and digitally recorded with consent, transcribed and translated into English. Transcripts were checked for cultural and interpretive interpretations by the research team, then analyzed thematically using the principles of constant comparison. The following themes will be presented: encountering people with self-harming behaviors; challenges encountered in managing people who self-harm; barriers to accessing care, and what ideal care might look like. Participants identified their lack of training and expertise in the management of people with self-harm behavior. Conclusions: This is the first study to explore clinicians' perspectives on self-harm in Pakistan. The study highlighted the need for training for doctors in the identification and management of mental health problems, including the management of people who self-harm.
| S-EPMC8172994 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdherence to diet and medical therapies are key to improving heart failure (HF) outcomes; however, nonadherence is common. While mobile apps may be a promising way to support patients with adherence via education and monitoring, HF patient perspectives regarding the use of apps for HF management in unknown. This data is critical for these tools to be successfully developed, implemented, and adopted to optimize adherence and improve HF outcomes.ObjectiveTo determine patients' needs, motivations, and challenges on the use of mobile apps to support HF management.MethodsA qualitative descriptive study using focus groups (n = 4,60 minutes) was conducted among HF patients from outpatient HF clinics in Toronto, Canada. The Diffusion of Innovation theory informed a ten-question interview guide. Interview transcripts were independently coded by two researchers and analyzed using content analysis.ResultsNineteen HF patients (65 ± 10 yrs, 12 men) identified a total of four key themes related to the use of mobile apps. The theme 'Factors impacting technology use by patients' identified motivations and challenges to app use, including access to credible information, easy and accessible user-interface. Three themes described patients' needs on the use of mobile apps to support HF management: 1) 'Providing patient support through access to information and self-monitoring', apps could provide education on HF-related content (e.g., diet, medication, symptoms); 2) 'Facilitating connection and communication', through information sharing with healthcare providers and connecting with other patients; 3) 'Patient preferences', app features such as reminders for medication, and visuals to show changes in HF symptoms were favoured.ConclusionsHF patients perceive several benefits and challenges to app use for HF self-management. Capitalizing on the benefits and addressing the challenges during the app development process may maximize adoption of such tools in this patient population.
| S-EPMC10174481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:While silent brain infarcts (SBIs) in screened cohorts are associated with risk of symptomatic stroke and dementia, the clinical significance of incidentally discovered SBIs (id-SBIs) is unknown. Detection may offer an opportunity to initiate prevention measures, but uncertainties about id-SBIs may impede clinicians from addressing them and complicate further study of this condition. METHODS AND RESULTS:This study used semi-structured interviews of practicing clinicians. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. A constant comparative method was used to organize emergent themes and examine new themes. Purposeful sampling was employed to achieve participant diversity. Fifteen clinicians were interviewed. Emergent themes centered on uncertainty about id-SBIs, clinical decision making in response to uncertainty, and evidence needed to resolve uncertainty. All clinicians reported uncertainty about id-SBIs: diagnostic, prognostic, or therapeutic. Differential responses to uncertainties resulted in practice variation within and between specialties. Diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty discouraged disclosure of imaging findings to patients. Vascular neurologists viewed the prognostic significance of id-SBIs as similar to symptomatic stroke. Therapeutic uncertainty was common, but most participants endorsed using stroke secondary prevention strategies. Regarding future research, all internists indicated they would consider changing practices in response to observational studies, whereas half of the neurologists expressed reluctance to modify practices based on non-randomized data. Several expressed concerns about clinical trial feasibility and lack of equipoise. CONCLUSIONS:id-SBIs are a focus of uncertainty for clinicians, leading to practice variation. Future studies must address diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty to facilitate implementation of prevention strategies.
| S-EPMC5875806 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBedside manner describes how clinicians relate to patients in person. Telemedicine allows clinicians to connect virtually with patients using digital tools. Effective virtual communication or webside manner may require modifications to traditional bedside manner.ObjectiveThis study aims to understand the experiences of telemedicine providers with patient-to-provider virtual visits and communication with families at a single large-volume children's hospital to inform program development and training for future clinicians.MethodsA total of 2 focus groups of pediatric clinicians (N=11) performing virtual visits before the COVID-19 pandemic, with a range of experiences and specialties, were engaged to discuss experiential, implementation, and practice-related issues. Focus groups were facilitated using a semistructured guide covering general experience, preparedness, rapport strategies, and suggestions. Sessions were digitally recorded, and the corresponding transcripts were reviewed for data analysis. The transcripts were coded based on the identified main themes and subthemes. On the basis of a higher-level analysis of these codes, the study authors generated a final set of key themes to describe the collected data.ResultsTheme consistency was identified across diverse participants, although individual clinician experiences were influenced by their specialties and practices. A total of 3 key themes emerged regarding the development of best practices, barriers to scalability, and establishing patient rapport. Issues and concerns related to privacy were salient across all themes. Clinicians felt that telemedicine required new skills for patient interaction, and not all were comfortable with their training.ConclusionsTelemedicine provides benefits as well as challenges to health care delivery. In interprofessional focus groups, pediatric clinicians emphasized the importance of considering safety and privacy to promote rapport and webside manner when conducting virtual visits. The inclusion of webside manner instructions within training curricula is crucial as telemedicine becomes an established modality for providing health care.
| S-EPMC8686477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCritically ill patients with 2009 H1N1 influenza are often treated in intensive care units (ICUs), representing significant risk of nosocomial transmission to critical care clinicians and other patients. Despite a large body of literature and guidelines recommending infection control practices, numerous barriers have been identified in ICUs, leading to poor compliance to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). The use of PPE among critical care clinicians has not been extensively evaluated, especially during the pandemic influenza. This study examined the knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported behaviors, and barriers to compliance with the use of PPE among ICU healthcare workers (HCWs) during the pandemic influenza.Methodology/principal findingsA survey instrument consisting of 36 questions was developed and mailed to all HCWs in 21 ICUs in 17 provinces in China. A total of 733 physicians, nurses, and other professionals were surveyed, and 650 (88.7%) were included in the analysis. Fifty-six percent of respondents reported having received training program of pandemic influenza before they cared for H1N1 patients, while 77% reported to have adequate knowledge of self and patient protection. Only 18% of respondents were able to correctly identify all components of PPE, and 55% reported high compliance (>80%) with PPE use during patient care. In multivariate analysis, vaccination for 2009 H1N1 influenza, positive attitudes towards PPE use, organizational factors such as availability of PPE in ICU, and patient information of influenza precautions, as well as reprimand for noncompliance by the supervisors were associated with high compliance, whereas negative attitudes towards PPE use and violation of PPE use were independent predictors of low compliance.Conclusion/significanceKnowledge and self-reported compliance to recommended PPE use among Chinese critical care clinicians is suboptimal. The perceived barriers should be addressed in order to close the significant gap between perception and knowledge or behavior.
| S-EPMC3434157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical decision aids are used in various medical fields to support patients and clinicians when making healthcare decisions. Few attempts have been made to implement such tools in psychiatry. We developed Treatment E-Assist (TREAT); a routine outcome monitoring based computerized clinical decision aid, which generates personalized treatment recommendations in the care of people with psychotic disorders. The aim of this study is to investigate how TREAT is used and evaluated by clinicians and how this tool can be improved.MethodsClinicians working with TREAT during a clinical trial were asked to participate in semi-structured interviews. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) was used as a sensitizing theory to structure a part of the interview questions. The transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis to uncover the main themes.ResultsThirteen clinicians (mean age: 49) of which eight psychiatrists and five nurse practitioners, participated in this study. Eight clinicians experienced TREAT as beneficial, whereas five experienced no additional benefits. Thematic analysis revealed five themes surrounding usage and evaluation of TREAT, views on TREAT's graphic representation of routine outcome monitoring results, guideline based treatment recommendations, contextual factors, effects on patients and effects on shared decision-making. Performance and effort expectancy were perceived as high by clinicians. The facilitating conditions were optimal and perceived social influence was low.ConclusionThis article presents a qualitative evaluation by clinicians of a computerized clinical decision aid in psychosis care. TREAT was viewed by most clinicians as beneficial during their consultations. The graphic representation of routine outcome monitoring results was well-appreciated and provided input to discuss treatment planning with patients. The treatment recommendations did not change most treatment decisions but supported clinical reasoning. However, some clinicians were unconvinced about TREAT's benefits. The delivery, applicability and the availability of resources require improvement to increase TREAT's efficacy. Not all patients responded well to TREAT but the observed facilitation of shared decision-making is promising. All four predictors of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology were positively evaluated by the majority of clinicians.
| S-EPMC7499839 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHypertension accounts for the greatest burden of disease worldwide, yet hypertension awareness and control rates are suboptimal, especially within low- and middle-income countries. Guidelines can enable consistency of care and improve health outcomes. A small body of studies investigating clinicians' perceptions and implementation of hypertension guidelines exists, mostly focussed on higher income settings. This study aims to explore how hypertension guidelines are used by clinicians across different resource settings, and the factors influencing their use.MethodsA qualitative approach was employed using convenience sampling and in-depth semi-structured interviews. Seventeen medical doctors were interviewed over video or telephone call from March to August 2020. Two clinicians worked in low-income countries, ten in middle-income countries, and five in high-income countries. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded inductively. Reflexive thematic analysis was used.ResultsThemes were generated at three levels at which clinicians perceived influencing factors to be operating: healthcare worker, healthcare worker interactions with patients, and the wider health system. Within each level, influencing factors were described as barriers to and facilitators of guideline use. Variation in factors occurred across income settings. At the healthcare worker level, usability of guidelines, trust in guidelines, attitudes and views about guidelines' purpose, and relevance to patient populations were identified as themes. Influencing factors at the health system level were accessibility of equipment and medications, workforce, and access to healthcare settings. Influences at the patient level were clinician perceived patient motivation and health literacy, and access to, and cost of treatment, although these represented doctors' perceptions rather than patient perceived factors.ConclusionsThis study adds a high level global view to previous studies investigating clinician perspectives on hypertension guideline use. Guidelines should be evidence-based, regularly updated and attention should be given to increasing applicability to LMICs and a range of healthcare professionals.
| S-EPMC8336017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDiscussions about goals of care with patients who are seriously ill typically occur infrequently and late in the illness trajectory, are of low quality, and focus narrowly on the patient's resuscitation preferences (ie, code status), risking provision of care that is inconsistent with patients' values. The Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) is a multifaceted communication intervention that builds capacity for clinicians to have earlier, more frequent, and more person-centered conversations.ObjectiveTo explore clinicians' experiences with the SICP 1 year after implementation.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study was conducted at 2 tertiary care hospitals in Canada. The SICP was implemented at Hamilton General Hospital (Hamilton, Ontario) from March 1, 2017, to January 19, 2018, and at Foothills Medical Centre (Calgary, Alberta) from March 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020. A total of 45 clinicians were invited to participate in the study, and 23 clinicians (51.1%) were enrolled and interviewed. Semistructured interviews of clinicians were conducted between August 2018 and May 2019. Content analysis was used to evaluate information obtained from these interviews between May 2019 and May 2020.ExposuresThe SICP includes clinician training, communication tools, and processes for system change.Main outcomes and measuresClinicians' experiences with and perceptions of the SICP.ResultsAmong 23 clinicians interviewed, 15 (65.2%) were women. The mean (SD) number of years in practice was 14.6 (9.1) at the Hamilton site and 12.0 (6.9) at the Calgary site. Participants included 19 general internists, 3 nurse practitioners, and 1 social worker. The 3 main themes were the ways in which the SICP (1) supported changes in clinician behavior, (2) shifted the focus of goals-of-care conversations beyond discussion of code status, and (3) influenced clinicians personally and professionally. Changes in clinician behavior were supported by having a unit champion, interprofessional engagement, access to copies of the Serious Illness Conversation Guide, and documentation in the electronic medical record. Elements of the program, especially the Serious Illness Conversation Guide, shifted the focus of goals-of-care conversations beyond discussion of code status and influenced clinicians on personal and professional levels. Concerns with the program included finding time to have conversations, building transient relationships, and limiting conversation fluidity.Conclusions and relevanceIn this qualitative study, hospital clinicians described components of the SICP as supporting changes in their behavior and facilitating meaningful patient interactions that shifted the focus of goals-of-care conversations beyond discussion of code status. The perceived benefits of SICP implementation stimulated uptake within the medical units. These findings suggest that the SICP may prompt hospital culture changes in goals-of-care dialogue with patients and the care of hospitalized patients with serious illness.
| S-EPMC8374609 | biostudies-literature