Factors behind ethical dilemmas regarding physical restraint for critical care nurses
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Physical restraint is among the commonly used methods for ensuring patient safety in intensive care units. However, nurses usually experience ethical dilemmas over using physical restraint because they need to weigh patient autonomy against patient safety. AIM: The aim of this study was to explore factors behind ethical dilemmas for critical care nurses over using physical restraint for patients. DESIGN: This is a qualitative study using conventional content analysis approach, as suggested by Graneheim and Lundman, to analyze the data. METHODS: Seventeen critical care nurses were purposefully recruited from the four intensive care units in Tehran, Iran. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews and were concurrently analyzed through conventional content analysis as suggested by Graneheim and Lundman. ETHICAL CONSIDERATION: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran with the code: IR.IUMS.REC.1397.795. Before interviews, participants were provided with explanations about the aim of the study, the confidentiality of the data, their freedom to participate, and the right to withdraw the study, and their free access to the study findings. Finally, their consents were obtained, and interviews were started. RESULTS: Factors behind ethical dilemmas for critical care nurses over using physical restraint were categorized into three main categories, namely the outcomes of using physical restraint, the outcomes of not using physical restraint, and emotional distress for nurses. The outcomes of using physical restraint were categorized into the three subcategories of ensuring patient safety, physical damage to patients, and mental damage to the patient. The outcomes of not using physical restraint fell into two subcategories, namely the risks associated with not using physical restraint and legal problems for nurses. Finally, the two subcategories of the emotional distress for nurses main category were nurses' negative feelings about restraint use and uncertainty over the decision on physical restraint use. CONCLUSION: Decision-making for restraint use is often associated with ethical dilemmas, because nurses need to weight the outcomes of its use against the outcomes of not using it and also consider patient safety and autonomy. Health authorities are recommended to develop clear evidence-based guidelines for restraint use and develop and implement educational and counseling programs for nurses on the principles of ethical nursing practice, patient rights, physical restraint guidelines and protocols, and management of emotional, ethical, and legal problems associated with physical restraint use.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,034 | 0,131 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,019 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».