Christine Øye1,2, Frode Fadnes Jacobsen2,3, Tone Elin Mekki2. 1. Stord/Haugesund University College, Stord, Norway. 2. Centre of Care Research West, Bergen University College, Bergen, Norway. 3. VID Specialized University, Bergen, Norway.
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate (1) what kind of restraint is used in three nursing homes in Norway and (2) how staff use restraint under what organisational conditions. BACKGROUND: Restraint use in residents living with dementia in nursing homes is controversial, and at odds with fundamental human rights. Restraint is a matter of hindering residents' free movement and will by applying either interactional, physical, medical, surveillance or environmental restraint. Previous research has identified use of restraint related to individual resident characteristics such as agitation, aggressiveness and wandering. DESIGN: This model is embedded in an overall mixed-method education intervention design study called Modelling and evaluating evidence-based continuing education program in dementia care (MEDCED), applying ethnography postintervention to examine the use of restraint in 24 nursing homes in Norway. METHOD: Based on restraint diversity measured in the trial, ethnographic investigation was carried out in three different nursing homes in Norway over a 10-month period to examine restraint use in relation to organisational constraints. RESULTS: Several forms of restraint were observed; among them, interactional restraint was used most frequently. We identified that use of restraint relates to the characteristics of individual residents, such as agitation, aggressiveness and wandering. However, restraint use should also be explained in relation to organisational conditions such as resident mix, staff culture and available human resources. CONCLUSION: A fluctuating and dynamic interplay between different individual and contextual factors determines whether restraint is used - or not in particular situations with residents living with dementia. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Educational initiatives targeting staff to reduce restraint must be sensitive towards fluctuating organisational constraints.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate (1) what kind of restraint is used in three nursing homes in Norway and (2) how staff use restraint under what organisational conditions. BACKGROUND: Restraint use in residents living with dementia in nursing homes is controversial, and at odds with fundamental human rights. Restraint is a matter of hindering residents' free movement and will by applying either interactional, physical, medical, surveillance or environmental restraint. Previous research has identified use of restraint related to individual resident characteristics such as agitation, aggressiveness and wandering. DESIGN: This model is embedded in an overall mixed-method education intervention design study called Modelling and evaluating evidence-based continuing education program in dementia care (MEDCED), applying ethnography postintervention to examine the use of restraint in 24 nursing homes in Norway. METHOD: Based on restraint diversity measured in the trial, ethnographic investigation was carried out in three different nursing homes in Norway over a 10-month period to examine restraint use in relation to organisational constraints. RESULTS: Several forms of restraint were observed; among them, interactional restraint was used most frequently. We identified that use of restraint relates to the characteristics of individual residents, such as agitation, aggressiveness and wandering. However, restraint use should also be explained in relation to organisational conditions such as resident mix, staff culture and available human resources. CONCLUSION: A fluctuating and dynamic interplay between different individual and contextual factors determines whether restraint is used - or not in particular situations with residents living with dementia. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Educational initiatives targeting staff to reduce restraint must be sensitive towards fluctuating organisational constraints.
Authors: Elisa Ambrosi; Martina Debiasi; Jessica Longhini; Lorenzo Giori; Luisa Saiani; Elisabetta Mezzalira; Federica Canzan Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-11-13 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Lauren M Robins; Den-Ching A Lee; J Simon Bell; Velandai Srikanth; Ralph Möhler; Keith D Hill; Terry P Haines Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 3.390