院前急救医疗环境中的身体约束:范围界定综述

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE African Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.afjem.2023.03.006
Jared MCDOWALL , Andrew William MAKKINK , Kelton JARMAN
{"title":"院前急救医疗环境中的身体约束:范围界定综述","authors":"Jared MCDOWALL ,&nbsp;Andrew William MAKKINK ,&nbsp;Kelton JARMAN","doi":"10.1016/j.afjem.2023.03.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Psychomotor agitation and aggressive behaviour (AAB) have the potential to occur in any healthcare setting, including those in which Emergency Medical Services (EMS) operate. This scoping review aimed to examine the available literature on physical restraint of patients within the prehospital setting and to identify guidelines and their effectiveness, safety to patients and health care practitioners and strategies relating to physical restraint when used by EMS.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We performed our scoping review using the methodological framework described by Arksey and O'Malley augmented by that of Sucharew and Macaluso. Several steps guided the review process: identification of the research question, eligibility criteria, information sources (CINAHL, Medline, Cochrane and Scopus), search, selection and data collection, ethical approval, collation, summarizing and reporting on the results.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The population of interest, in this scoping review was prehospital physically restrained patients, however, there was a reduced research focus on this population in comparison to the larger emergency department.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The limitation of informed consent from incapacitated patients may relate to the lack of prospective real-world research from previous and future studies. Future research should focus on patient management, adverse events, practitioner risk, policy, and education within the prehospital setting.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48515,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10276259/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physical restraint within the prehospital Emergency Medical Care Environment: A scoping review\",\"authors\":\"Jared MCDOWALL ,&nbsp;Andrew William MAKKINK ,&nbsp;Kelton JARMAN\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.afjem.2023.03.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Psychomotor agitation and aggressive behaviour (AAB) have the potential to occur in any healthcare setting, including those in which Emergency Medical Services (EMS) operate. This scoping review aimed to examine the available literature on physical restraint of patients within the prehospital setting and to identify guidelines and their effectiveness, safety to patients and health care practitioners and strategies relating to physical restraint when used by EMS.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We performed our scoping review using the methodological framework described by Arksey and O'Malley augmented by that of Sucharew and Macaluso. Several steps guided the review process: identification of the research question, eligibility criteria, information sources (CINAHL, Medline, Cochrane and Scopus), search, selection and data collection, ethical approval, collation, summarizing and reporting on the results.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The population of interest, in this scoping review was prehospital physically restrained patients, however, there was a reduced research focus on this population in comparison to the larger emergency department.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The limitation of informed consent from incapacitated patients may relate to the lack of prospective real-world research from previous and future studies. Future research should focus on patient management, adverse events, practitioner risk, policy, and education within the prehospital setting.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48515,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10276259/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211419X23000125\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211419X23000125","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景心理运动激动和攻击性行为(AAB)有可能发生在任何医疗环境中,包括紧急医疗服务(EMS)所在的环境。这项范围界定审查旨在审查关于院前环境中患者身体约束的现有文献,并确定指南及其有效性,EMS使用时对患者和医护人员的安全性以及与身体约束相关的策略。方法我们使用Arksey和O'Malley描述的方法框架进行了范围界定审查,并补充了Sucharew和Macaluso的方法框架。指导审查过程的几个步骤:确定研究问题、资格标准、信息来源(CINAHL、Medline、Cochrane和Scopus)、搜索、选择和数据收集、伦理批准、整理、总结和报告结果。结果在这项范围界定审查中,感兴趣的人群是院前身体受限的患者,然而,与较大的急诊科相比,对这一人群的研究重点有所减少。结论丧失行为能力患者知情同意的局限性可能与之前和未来研究缺乏前瞻性的现实世界研究有关。未来的研究应侧重于院前环境中的患者管理、不良事件、从业者风险、政策和教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Physical restraint within the prehospital Emergency Medical Care Environment: A scoping review

Background

Psychomotor agitation and aggressive behaviour (AAB) have the potential to occur in any healthcare setting, including those in which Emergency Medical Services (EMS) operate. This scoping review aimed to examine the available literature on physical restraint of patients within the prehospital setting and to identify guidelines and their effectiveness, safety to patients and health care practitioners and strategies relating to physical restraint when used by EMS.

Methods

We performed our scoping review using the methodological framework described by Arksey and O'Malley augmented by that of Sucharew and Macaluso. Several steps guided the review process: identification of the research question, eligibility criteria, information sources (CINAHL, Medline, Cochrane and Scopus), search, selection and data collection, ethical approval, collation, summarizing and reporting on the results.

Results

The population of interest, in this scoping review was prehospital physically restrained patients, however, there was a reduced research focus on this population in comparison to the larger emergency department.

Conclusion

The limitation of informed consent from incapacitated patients may relate to the lack of prospective real-world research from previous and future studies. Future research should focus on patient management, adverse events, practitioner risk, policy, and education within the prehospital setting.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.70%
发文量
78
审稿时长
85 days
期刊最新文献
From vocational to graduation: A mixed methods study of support needs for vocational learners pursuing post-graduate education in South Africa Improving pain management for trauma patients at two Rwandan emergency departments Descriptive analysis of road traffic crashes encountered by Tanzanian motorcycle taxi drivers trained in first aid Workplace violence in three public sector emergency departments, Gauteng, South Africa: A cross-sectional survey Healthcare professionals perceptions towards the determinants of effective emergency health care services in public health centres of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1