Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Oct 15;3(1):5.
doi: 10.1186/1472-6955-3-5.

Physical restraint use among nursing home residents: A comparison of two data collection methods

Physical restraint use among nursing home residents: A comparison of two data collection methods

Danielle Laurin et al. BMC Nurs. .

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In view of the issues surrounding physical restraint use, it is important to have a method of measurement as valid and reliable as possible. We determined the sensitivity and specificity of physical restraint use a) reported by nursing staff and b) reviewed from medical and nursing records in nursing home settings, by comparing these methods with direct observation. METHODS: We sampled eight care units in skilled nursing homes, seven care units in nursing homes and one long-term care unit in a hospital, from eight facilities which included 28 nurses and 377 residents. Physical restraint use was assessed the day following three periods of direct observation by two different means: interview with one or several members of the regular nursing staff, and review of medical and nursing records. Sensitivity and specificity values were calculated according to 2-by-2 contingency tables. Differences between the methods were assessed using the phi coefficient. Other information collected included: demographic characteristics, disruptive behaviors, body alignment problems, cognitive and functional skills. RESULTS: Compared to direct observation (gold standard), reported restraint use by nursing staff yielded a sensitivity of 87.4% at a specificity of 93.7% (phi = 0.84). When data was reviewed from subjects' medical and nursing records, sensitivity was reduced to 74.8%, and specificity to 86.3% (phi = 0.54). Justifications for restraint use including risk for falls, agitation, body alignment problems and aggressiveness were associated with the use of physical restraints. CONCLUSIONS: The interview of nursing staff and the review of medical and nursing records are both valid and reliable techniques for measuring physical restraint use among nursing home residents. Higher sensitivity and specificity values were achieved when nursing staff was interviewed as compared to reviewing medical records. This study suggests that the interview of nursing staff is a more reliable method of data collection.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kane RL, Williams CC, Franklin Williams T, Kane RA. Restraining restraints: Changes in a standard of care. Annu Rev Public Health. 1993;14:545–584. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pu.14.050193.002553. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sloane PD, Papougenis D, Blakeslee JA. Alternatives to physical and pharmacologic restraints in long-term care. Am Fam Physician. 1992;45:763–769. - PubMed
    1. Levine JM, Marchello V, Totolos E. Progress toward a restraint-free environment in a large academic nursing facility. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1995;43:914–918. - PubMed
    1. Nursing Home Reform Publ No PL 100-203. Washington DC, US Government Printing Office; 1987. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, Subtitle C.
    1. Castle NG, Mor V. Physical restraints in nursing homes: A review of the literature since the Nursing Home Reform Act of 1987. Med Care Res Rev. 1998;55:139–176. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources