BACKGROUND: Physical restraint has been commonly indicated to patients with brain dysfunction in neurocritical care. The effect of physical restraints on outcomes of critically ill adults remains controversial as no randomized controlled trials have compared its safety and efficacy, and the association between physical restraint requirement and neurological outcome in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) has not been fully examined. The aim of this study was to examine the association between physical restraint requirement and neurological outcomes in patients with SAH. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective study was conducted on patients with acute phase SAH treated for > 72 h in the intensive care unit from 2014 to 2020. Patients were divided into three groups based on the amount of time required for physical restraint during the first 24-72 h after admission: no, intermittent, and continuous use of physical restraint. Unfavorable neurologic outcome, assessed using the modified Rankin scale upon hospital discharge, has been considered as primary end point. RESULTS: Overall, 101 patients were included in the study, with 52 patients (51.5%) having unfavorable neurological outcomes. Among them, 46 patients (45.5%) did not use physical restraint, and 55 (54.5%) patients used physical restraint during the first 24-72 h after admission: 26 (25.7%) intermittent and 29 (28.7%) continuous. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that continuous use of physical restraint during the first 24-72 h after admission was significantly associated with unfavorable neurological outcomes in patients with SAH (odds ratio, 3.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-13.06; p = 0.042) compared with no physical restraint. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous use of physical restraint during the first 24-72 h after admission was more significantly associated with unfavorable neurological outcomes than no physical restraint among patients with SAH during the acute phase.
BACKGROUND: Physical restraint has been commonly indicated to patients with brain dysfunction in neurocritical care. The effect of physical restraints on outcomes of critically ill adults remains controversial as no randomized controlled trials have compared its safety and efficacy, and the association between physical restraint requirement and neurological outcome in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) has not been fully examined. The aim of this study was to examine the association between physical restraint requirement and neurological outcomes in patients with SAH. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective study was conducted on patients with acute phase SAH treated for > 72 h in the intensive care unit from 2014 to 2020. Patients were divided into three groups based on the amount of time required for physical restraint during the first 24-72 h after admission: no, intermittent, and continuous use of physical restraint. Unfavorable neurologic outcome, assessed using the modified Rankin scale upon hospital discharge, has been considered as primary end point. RESULTS: Overall, 101 patients were included in the study, with 52 patients (51.5%) having unfavorable neurological outcomes. Among them, 46 patients (45.5%) did not use physical restraint, and 55 (54.5%) patients used physical restraint during the first 24-72 h after admission: 26 (25.7%) intermittent and 29 (28.7%) continuous. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that continuous use of physical restraint during the first 24-72 h after admission was significantly associated with unfavorable neurological outcomes in patients with SAH (odds ratio, 3.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-13.06; p = 0.042) compared with no physical restraint. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous use of physical restraint during the first 24-72 h after admission was more significantly associated with unfavorable neurological outcomes than no physical restraint among patients with SAH during the acute phase.
Authors: Michael E Reznik; Ali Mahta; J Michael Schmidt; Hans-Peter Frey; Soojin Park; David J Roh; Sachin Agarwal; Jan Claassen Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: John W Devlin; Yoanna Skrobik; Céline Gélinas; Dale M Needham; Arjen J C Slooter; Pratik P Pandharipande; Paula L Watson; Gerald L Weinhouse; Mark E Nunnally; Bram Rochwerg; Michele C Balas; Mark van den Boogaard; Karen J Bosma; Nathaniel E Brummel; Gerald Chanques; Linda Denehy; Xavier Drouot; Gilles L Fraser; Jocelyn E Harris; Aaron M Joffe; Michelle E Kho; John P Kress; Julie A Lanphere; Sharon McKinley; Karin J Neufeld; Margaret A Pisani; Jean-Francois Payen; Brenda T Pun; Kathleen A Puntillo; Richard R Riker; Bryce R H Robinson; Yahya Shehabi; Paul M Szumita; Chris Winkelman; John E Centofanti; Carrie Price; Sina Nikayin; Cheryl J Misak; Pamela D Flood; Ken Kiedrowski; Waleed Alhazzani Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Michael E Reznik; J Michael Schmidt; Ali Mahta; Sachin Agarwal; David J Roh; Soojin Park; Hans Peter Frey; Jan Claassen Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Blessing N R Jaja; Hester Lingsma; Ewout W Steyerberg; Tom A Schweizer; Kevin E Thorpe; R Loch Macdonald Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2015-10-23 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Andrew M Naidech; Jennifer L Beaumont; Neil F Rosenberg; Matthew B Maas; Adam R Kosteva; Michael L Ault; David Cella; E Wesley Ely Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2013-12-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Yahya Shehabi; Rinaldo Bellomo; Michael C Reade; Michael Bailey; Frances Bass; Belinda Howe; Colin McArthur; Ian M Seppelt; Steve Webb; Leonie Weisbrodt Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2012-08-02 Impact factor: 21.405