RESUMEN
AIMS: To identify nursing experience on physical restraint management in Critical Care Units. To analyse similarities and differences in nursing experience on physical restraint management according to the clinical context that they are involved in. METHOD: A multicentre phenomenological study was carried out including 14 Critical Care Units in Madrid, classified according to physical restraint use: Common/systematic use, lacking/personalised use, and mixed use. Five focus groups (23 participants were selected following purposeful sampling) were convened, concluding in data saturation. Data analysis was focused on thematic content analysis following Colaizzi's method. FINDINGS: Six main themes: Physical restraint meaning in Critical Care Units, safety (self-retreat vital devices), contribution factors, feelings, alternatives, and pending issues. Although some themes are common to the 3 Critical Care Unit types, discourse differences are found as regards to indication, feelings, systematic use of pain and sedation measurement tools. CONCLUSIONS: In order to achieve real physical restraint reduction in Critical Care Units, it is necessary to have a deep understanding of restraints use in the specific clinical context. As self-retreat vital devices emerge as central concept, some interventions proposed in other settings could not be effective, requiring alternatives for critical care patients. Discourse variations laid out in the different Critical Care Unit types could highlight key items that determine the use and different attitudes towards physical restraint.
Asunto(s)
Enfermería de Cuidados Críticos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Restricción Física , Femenino , Humanos , MasculinoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Patients in the immediate postoperative period of cardiac surgery have abolished communication skills and therefore can not express pain. Pain produces significant adverse effects that alter the patients' course. Therefore, identifying and controlling them will lead to increased quality of care for the critical patient. OBJECTIVE: To measure the degree of pain in patients in the immediate postoperative period of cardiac surgery by scaling Behavioural Pain Scale. MATERIAL AND METHOD: An observational, prospective and longitudinal. Patients over 18 years in the first 24 hours of admission with no communication problems who were under sedation and subjected to mechanical ventilation were included. Twenty patients were enrolled in the study. The Behavioural Pain Scale (BPS) was used during two procedures usually considered as a painful practice in the literature, that is, mobilization and/or postural changes and aspiration of secretions. RESULTS: Twenty-seven measurements were made of procedures considered as painful. The results obtained by applying the scale BPS showed that 70.4% of patients had no pain, 22.2% had mild to moderate pain and 7.4% had unacceptable pain. CONCLUSION: This study has identified that the patients suffer pain during the postoperative period. Within these patients, there is a small, but not insignificant number whose pain is unacceptable during this period. This finding serves as a beginning for a line of research to improve the handling of the postoperative pain during immediate post-operative cardiac surgery.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Cardíacos , Dimensión del Dolor/métodos , Dolor Postoperatorio/diagnóstico , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The study aim was to explore the experience of doctors and nursing assistants in the management of physical restraint (PR) in critical care units. METHOD: A multicentre phenomenological study that included 14 critical care units (CCU) in Madrid (Spain). The CCU were stratified according to their use of physical restraint: "frequently used" versus "seldom used". Three focus groups were formed: the first comprised nursing assistants from CCUs that frequently used physical restraint, the second comprised nursing assistants from CCUs that seldom used physical constraint, and the final group comprised doctors from both CCU subtypes. Sampling method: purposive. DATA ANALYSIS: thematic content analysis. Data saturation was achieved. RESULTS: Four principle themes emerged: 1) concept of safety and risk (patient safety versus the safety of the professional), 2) types of restraint, 3) professional responsibilities (prescription, recording, and professional roles) and 4) "zero restraint" paradigm. The conceptualisation regarding the use of physical contentions shows differences in some of the principal themes, depending on the type of CCU, in terms of policies, use and management of physical constraint (frequently used versus seldom used). CONCLUSIONS: The real reduction in the use of physical restraint in CCU must be based on one crucial point: acceptance of the complexity of the phenomenon. The use of physical restraint observed in the different CCU is influenced by individual, group and organisational factors. These factors will determine how doctors and nursing assistants interpret safety and risk, the centre of care (patient or professional-centred care), the concept of restraint, professional responsibilities and interventions, interactions of the team and the leadership.