The Ethics of Physical Restraints in Geriatric Care

Authors: Bei Shan Lin, Chun Mei Lu, Ya Ping Chen, Li Chen Lu

Abstract:

This study explores the ethical issues concerning the use of physical restraint in geriatric care. Physical restraint use in a medical care setting is seen as a controversial form of treatment that has occurred over decades. There is no doubt that people nowadays are living longer than previous generations. The ageing process is inevitable. Common disease such as impaired comprehension, memory loss, and trouble expressing one’s self contribute to the difficulty that these older patients have in adapting to medical institution. For these reasons, physical restraint is often used in reducing the risk of falling, managing wandering behaviour, preventing agitation, and promoting patient compliance in geriatric care. It can mean that physical restraints are considered as a common practice that is used in the care of older patients. It is most commonly used for three specific purposes, including procedural restraint, restraint to prevent falls, and behavioural restraints. Although there have been well documented instances of morbidity and mortality recognised as being potential risks associated with physical restraint use, it continues to be permitted and used in healthcare, often in the name of safety. However, there is insufficient evidence supporting the effectiveness of physical restraint use reducing injuries from falls and controlling challenging behaviour in geriatric care settings. There is barely any empirical evidence of either a scientific basis or clinical trials have evaluated the improvement in patient safety following physical restraint. In difficult clinical situations, guidelines and practical suggestions for Healthcare professionals to comply requirements can help those making appropriate decisions and to facilitate better judgement regarding physical restraint use. The following recommendations are given for physical restraint use in long-term care settings: an interdisciplinary team approach to assess, evaluate, and treat underlying diseases to determine if treatment can ease issues precipitating physical restraint use; a clearly stated purpose of treatment plan should be made after weighing up the risk of physical restraint use against the risk of without physical restraint use; a care plan for physical restraint has to include individualised treatment planning, informed consent, identification and remedial action to avoid negative consequences, regular assessment and modification, reduction and removal of risks; patients and their families must have the opportunity to consider and give voluntary informed consent prior to physical restraint utilisation; patients, family members, and Healthcare professionals should be educated on use and adverse consequences of physical restraints in order to make raise awareness of potential risks and to take appropriate steps to prevent unnecessary harm; after physical restraint removal, Healthcare professionals should discuss with patients and family members about their experience, feelings, and any anxieties regarding the treatment. Physical restraint should always be considered a last resort as deprive patient’s freedom, control, and individuality. Healthcare professionals should emphasise on providing individualized care, interdisciplinary decision-making process, and creative and collaborative alternatives to promote older patient’s rights, dignity and overall well-being as much as possible.

Keywords: ethics healthcare, geriatric care, healthcare, physical restraint