Efficient and accurate measurement of physical restraint use in acute care.

OBJECTIVES: Describe and evaluate a method for assessing whether physical restraint prevalence differs by timing and frequency of data collection and to determine the minimum period of observation necessary to provide accurate prevalence estimates on both Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and medical-surgical units. DESIGN: Two-period, cross-sectional design with repeated observations in year 1 for 18 consecutive days and in year 2 for 21 consecutive days with method modifications. SETTING: 400-bed urban teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All beds on general medical, surgical, and intensive care units. MEASUREMENT: Direct observation of patients, nurse interview, and medical record review conducted by trained observers. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in mean restraint use prevalence rates comparing: (a) morning and evening periods; (b) weekdays and weekend days; and (c) observation periods of 7, 14, or 21 consecutive days or for 7 days using every 3rd day on either medical-surgical units or ICUs. Analyses using data from an increasing number of days of observation indicates that the mean prevalence rate stabilizes after 16 days. There were larger mean differences for comparisons on ICU-ventilator units and lack of significant differences may be due to low statistical power. CONCLUSION: Direct observation by trained observers, supplemented by nurse report and medical record documentation over brief monitoring periods, results in accurate, nonintrusive, cost-efficient estimates of physical restraint prevalence. As few as seven consecutive or nonconsecutive days in measuring restraint prevalence is sufficient to obtain accurate estimates, although the number of days may vary depending on patient mix and unit type.

The surrogate's experience in authorizing a do not resuscitate order.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the subjective experience of surrogates who authorize do not resuscitate (DNR) orders. This experience seems especially acute in settings such as New York State, where patients and surrogates generally give written consent for DNR orders. The goal of this study is to investigate the subjective and emotional experience of surrogates who authorize DNR orders in this setting. METHODS: A qualitative, phenomenological research design was used. Surrogates of patients on the medical service were approached no earlier than 1 day and no later than 7 days after authorizing a DNR order. The interview guide was open-ended and included general prompts. Interviews were taped and transcribed. Researchers then coded the transcripts and examined the data for clusters of themes. They then met to discuss and recode disagreements. RESULTS: Saturation was met after 10 subjects were interviewed. The following major surrogate themes were found: (1) Signing a DNR order is a process, not an isolated act. (2) The presence or absence of good quality communication and psychological support from health care personnel are among the most important factors in this process. (3) The process of signing a DNR order can raise many negative emotions including guilt, ambivalence, and conflict. (4) Prior discussions, documents such as living wills, and consensus among family members make it easier to determine the patient's wishes and carry them out by signing the DNR. (5) The surrogates believed that signing a DNR order is a prerequisite to obtaining adequate opioid analgesia. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The experience of authorizing a DNR order is a complex and emotional decision-making process. Evidence of the patient's prior wishes and support from health care personnel make the process easier. It is disconcerting that surrogates viewed DNR orders as a prerequisite to obtaining relief for a patient's pain or suffering.