Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Originalarbeit

Freiheitseinschränkung aus Sicht der Interessenvertretungen von Pflegeheimbewohnerinnen und -bewohnern − eine qualitative Studie

Published Online:February 08, 2019https://doi.org/10.1024/1012-5302/a000664

Abstract

Zusammenfassung. Hintergrund: Freiheitseinschränkende Maßnahmen werden trotz fehlenden Belegs zum Nutzen und bekannter negativer Konsequenzen regelmäßig in Pflegeheimen eingesetzt. Neben Pflegenden können Angehörige, Betreuer / -innen, Vorsorgebevollmächtigte und Heimbeiräte als Interessenvertretungen der Bewohner / -innen den Einsatz der Maßnahmen beeinflussen. Ziel: Beschreibung der Sichtweise von Interessenvertretungen der Heimbewohner / -innen zur Anwendung und Reduktion von freiheitseinschränkenden Maßnahmen. Methodik: Für die Prozessevaluation einer pragmatischen cluster-randomisierten Studie wurden teilstrukturierte Einzel- (n = 4) und Fokusgruppeninterviews (n = 4) mit 22 Personen (vier Angehörige in der Rolle als Betreuer / -innen oder Vorsorgebevollmächtigte, eine Berufsbetreuerin, 16 Heimbeiräte) geführt und mittels qualitativer Inhaltsanalyse analysiert. Ergebnisse: Fünf Kategorien in Bezug auf freiheitseinschränkende Maßnahmen wurden gebildet: 1. Umgang im Setting Pflegeheim; 2. Bewertung der Anwendung bzw. Reduktion; 3. Information zur Anwendung bzw. Reduktion; 4. Entscheidungen zur Anwendung bzw. Reduktion; 5. Auswirkungen der Anwendung bzw. Reduktion. Interessenvertretungen sehen den Einsatz der Maßnahmen zur Sturzprophylaxe und Kontrolle von herausforderndem Verhalten als notwendig an und haben kaum Wissen zu Alternativen. Schlussfolgerungen: Angehörige, Berufsbetreuer / -innen und Heimbeiräte zeigen eher unkritische Haltungen und haben Informationsdefizite zu freiheitseinschränkenden Maßnahmen. Bei Interventionen zur Reduktion der Maßnahmen in Pflegeheimen könnte die Aufklärung dieser Gruppen unterstützend wirken.


Physical restraints from the perspective of advocates of nursing home residents – a qualitative Study

Abstract. Background: Physical restraints are commonly used in nursing homes despite clear evidence of the lack of effectiveness and a high risk of negative consequences. Beside nurses, other persons acting as advocates of nursing home residents like relatives, legal guardians and members of the resident council, could also influence the use of physical restraints. Objective: To describe the perceptions and attitudes of advocates of nursing home residents regarding the use and reduction of physical restraints. Methods: Four semi-structured interviews and four focus groups with a total of 22 participants (five relatives, one legal guardian, 16 members of resident councils) were conducted for the process evaluation of a pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial and analysed through qualitative content analysis. Results: Five categories regarding physical restraints were identified: 1. Use in nursing home setting; 2. Evaluation of use and reduction; 3. Information on use and reduction; 4. Decision about use and reduction; 5. Effects of use and reduction. Overall, the three groups of advocates describe physical restraints as necessary to prevent falls and to control challenging behaviour and have little knowledge regarding alternatives. Conclusions: Relatives, legal guardians and members of the nursing home resident council showed uncritical attitudes and a lack of knowledge towards physical restraints. Addressing these groups through information and education in interventions aiming to avoid physical restraints in nursing homes could be supportive.

Literatur

  • Abraham, J., Möhler, R., Henkel, A., Kupfer, R., Icks, A., Dintsios, C. M., … Köpke, S. (2015). Implementation of a Multicomponent intervention to Prevent Physical Restraints In Nursing home residenTs (IMPRINT): study protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled trial. BMC geriatrics. doi: 10.1186/s12877-015-0086-0 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Bleijlevens, M. H., Wagner, L. M., Capezuti, E. & Hamers, J. P. (2016). Physical Restraints: Consensus of a Research Definition Using a Modified Delphi Technique. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 64 (11), 2307 – 2310. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Castle, N. G. & Engberg, J. (2009). The health consequences of using physical restraints in nursing homes. Medical Care, 47 (11), 1164 – 1173. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Dresing, T. & Pehl, T. (2013). Praxisbuch Transkription. Regelsysteme, Software und praktische Anleitungen für qualitative ForscherInnen. 5. Aufl. Marburg: Eigenverlag. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Duxbury, J., Pulsford, D., Hadi, M. & Sykes, S. (2013). Staff and relatives’ perspectives on the aggressive behaviour of older people with dementia in residential care: a qualitative study. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 20 (9), 792 – 800. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Evans D. & Fitzgerald M. (2002). Reasons for physically restraining patients and residents: a systematic review and content analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 39 (7), 735 – 743. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Evans D., Wood J., Lambert L. & Fitzgerald M. (2002). Physical restraint in acute and residential care: a systematic review. Adelaide, Australia: Joanna Briggs Institute for Evidence Based Nursing and Midwifery. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Evans, D., Wood, J. & Lambert, L. (2003). Patient injury and physical restraint devices. a systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41 (3), 274 – 282. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Gagnon, M. P., Desmartis, M., Dipankui, M. T., Gagnon, J. & St-Pierre, M. (2013). Alternatives to seclusion and restraint in psychiatry and in long-term care facilities for the elderly: perspectives of service users and family members. The Patient, 6 (4), 269 – 280. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Gulpers M. J., Bleijlevens M. H., AmbergenT., Capezuti E., van Rossum E. & Hamers J. P. (2011). Belt restraint reduction in nursing homes: effects of a multicomponent intervention program. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 59 (11), 2029 – 2036. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Haut, A., Kolbe, N., Strupeit, S., Mayer, H. & Meyer, G. (2010). Attitudes of relatives of nursing home residents toward physical restraints. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 42 (4), 448 – 456. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Healey, F., Oliver, D., Milne, A. & Connelly, J. B. (2008). The effect of bedrails on falls and injury. a systematic review of clinical studies. Age and Ageing, 37 (4), 368 – 378. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • HeimmwV. Heimmitwirkungsverordnung in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 25. Juli 2002 (BGBl. I S.2896). First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Heinze, C., Dassen, T. & Grittner, U. (2012). Use of physical restraints in nursing homes and hospitals and related factors: a cross-sectional study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21 (7 – 8), 1033 – 1040. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hofmann, H. & Hahn, S. (2014). Characteristics of nursing home residents and physical restraint: a systematic literature review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 23 (21 – 22), 3012 – 3024. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Kong, E. H., Choi, H. & Evans, L. K. (2017). Staff Perceptions of Barriers to Physical Restraint-Reduction in Long-Term Care: A meta-synthesis. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26 (1 – 2), 49 – 60. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Köpke S., Mühlhauser I., Gerlach A., Haut A., Haastert B., Möhler R. & Meyer G. (2012). Effect of a guideline-based multicomponent intervention on use of physical restraints in nursing homes: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 307 (20), 2177 – 2184. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Köpke, S., Möhler, R., Abraham, J., Henkel, A., Kupfer, R. & Meyer, G. (Universität zu Lübeck & Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Hrsg.). (2015). Leitlinie FEM – Evidenzbasierte Praxisleitlinie. Vermeidung von freiheitseinschränkenden Maßnahmen in der beruflichen Altenpflege. http://www.leitlinie-fem.de/download/LL_FEM_2015_Auflage-2.pdf [30.10.2018]. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. 11. Aufl. Weinheim: Beltz. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • MDS (2017). Qualität in der ambulanten und stationären Pflege. 5. PFLEGE-QUALITÄTSBERICHT DES MDS NACH § 114A ABS. 6 SGB XI. Essen: MDS. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Meyer, G., Köpke, S., Haastert, B. & Mühlhauser, I. (2009). Restraint use among nursing home residents: cross-sectional study and prospective cohort study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18 (7), 981 – 990. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Möhler R., Richter T., Köpke S. & Meyer G.(2012). Interventions for preventing and reducing the use of physical restraints in long-term geriatric care – a Cochrane review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21 (21 – 22), 3070 – 3081. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Möhler, R. & Meyer, G. (2014). Attitudes of nurses towards the use of physical restraints in geriatric care: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 51 (2), 274 – 288. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Moore, K. & Haralambous, B. (2007). Barriers to reducing the use of restraints in residential elder care facilities. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58 (6), 532 – 540. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Saarnio, R. & Isola, A. (2009). Use of physical restraint in institutional elderly care in Finland: perspectives of patients and their family members. Research in Gerontological Nursing, 2 (4), 276 – 286. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Sze T. W., Leng C. Y. & Lin S. K. (2012). The effectiveness of physical restraints in reducing falls among adults in acute care hospitals and nursing homes: a systematic review. JBI Library of Systematic Reviews, 10 (5), 307 – 351. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5 (2), 207 – 232. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar