File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Use of physical restraints in rehabilitation settings: Staff knowledge, attitudes and predictors

TitleUse of physical restraints in rehabilitation settings: Staff knowledge, attitudes and predictors
Authors
KeywordsSurvey
Nursing staff
Physical restraint
Questionnaires
Rehabilitation
Elder care
Empirical research report
Issue Date2006
Citation
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2006, v. 55, n. 1, p. 20-28 How to Cite?
AbstractAim. This paper reports a study examining the knowledge, attitudes and practices of staff with regard to the use of restraints in rehabilitative settings, and quantifying the direct and indirect effects of the factors that influenced these practices. Background. Nursing staff hold many misconceptions that support the continued use of physical restraints as a desirable technique in clinical settings to control clients. A number of previous studies measuring the knowledge, attitudes and/or practices of nursing staff towards the use of restraints have been conducted in acute, elder care, or psychiatric settings. However, not many have examined the predictors of staff practices when restraints are applied. In the study rep orted here, physical restraint was defined as any manual method or physical/mechanical device, material or equipment attached to a client's body so that their free movement was restricted. Methods. A questionnaire was administered to 168 nursing staff in two rehabilitation centres in Hong Kong. The data were collected in 2002-2003 and the response rate was 80%. Findings. Inadequate knowledge and negative attitudes on the use of restraints were found among staff. Most believed that good alternatives to restraints are not available, or they underestimated the physical and psychological impact of restraints on clients. Path analysis indicated that staff attitudes and their clinical experiences had positive direct effects on restraint use. In addition, level of knowledge and clinical experience had a positive indirect effect on practice by influencing attitudes. Conclusion. These data could serve as a basis for re-educating nursing staff on the subject. Staff with more clinical experience could give appropriate guidance to other members of staff on decisions to apply restraints. More effective alternative interventions to restraining clients should be explored. Once the gaps in knowledge are closed, more positive attitudes among staff towards the use of restraints can be cultivated, thus leading to a higher standard of nursing practice. © 2006 The Authors.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/250910
ISSN
2021 Impact Factor: 3.057
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.948
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSuen, Lorna K.P.-
dc.contributor.authorLai, C. K.Y.-
dc.contributor.authorWong, T. K.S.-
dc.contributor.authorChow, S. K.Y.-
dc.contributor.authorKong, S. K.F.-
dc.contributor.authorHo, J. Y.L.-
dc.contributor.authorKong, T. K.-
dc.contributor.authorLeung, J. S.C.-
dc.contributor.authorWong, I. Y.C.-
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-01T01:54:03Z-
dc.date.available2018-02-01T01:54:03Z-
dc.date.issued2006-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Advanced Nursing, 2006, v. 55, n. 1, p. 20-28-
dc.identifier.issn0309-2402-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/250910-
dc.description.abstractAim. This paper reports a study examining the knowledge, attitudes and practices of staff with regard to the use of restraints in rehabilitative settings, and quantifying the direct and indirect effects of the factors that influenced these practices. Background. Nursing staff hold many misconceptions that support the continued use of physical restraints as a desirable technique in clinical settings to control clients. A number of previous studies measuring the knowledge, attitudes and/or practices of nursing staff towards the use of restraints have been conducted in acute, elder care, or psychiatric settings. However, not many have examined the predictors of staff practices when restraints are applied. In the study rep orted here, physical restraint was defined as any manual method or physical/mechanical device, material or equipment attached to a client's body so that their free movement was restricted. Methods. A questionnaire was administered to 168 nursing staff in two rehabilitation centres in Hong Kong. The data were collected in 2002-2003 and the response rate was 80%. Findings. Inadequate knowledge and negative attitudes on the use of restraints were found among staff. Most believed that good alternatives to restraints are not available, or they underestimated the physical and psychological impact of restraints on clients. Path analysis indicated that staff attitudes and their clinical experiences had positive direct effects on restraint use. In addition, level of knowledge and clinical experience had a positive indirect effect on practice by influencing attitudes. Conclusion. These data could serve as a basis for re-educating nursing staff on the subject. Staff with more clinical experience could give appropriate guidance to other members of staff on decisions to apply restraints. More effective alternative interventions to restraining clients should be explored. Once the gaps in knowledge are closed, more positive attitudes among staff towards the use of restraints can be cultivated, thus leading to a higher standard of nursing practice. © 2006 The Authors.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Advanced Nursing-
dc.subjectSurvey-
dc.subjectNursing staff-
dc.subjectPhysical restraint-
dc.subjectQuestionnaires-
dc.subjectRehabilitation-
dc.subjectElder care-
dc.subjectEmpirical research report-
dc.titleUse of physical restraints in rehabilitation settings: Staff knowledge, attitudes and predictors-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03883.x-
dc.identifier.pmid16768736-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33744905006-
dc.identifier.volume55-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage20-
dc.identifier.epage28-
dc.identifier.eissn1365-2648-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000238762600005-
dc.identifier.issnl0309-2402-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats