Physical Restraints in Intensive Care Unit Patients

NCT ID: NCT04957238

Last Updated: 2024-02-15

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

4000 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2022-05-18

Study Completion Date

2026-02-27

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The use of physical restraints is common practice in Intensive Care Units (ICU). This medically prescribed procedure requires full attention of medical and paramedical teams for its implementation, monitoring and ending, as a major restriction of patients' individual freedom. French highest authority for health has defined, for geriatrics and psychiatric units, ten criteria of good practice for physical restraints' use. Routine practice reports critically ill patients' safety as main reason of use. This decision, often left to the sole discretion of nurses, varies according to their own representation of this risk, and depends on several factors: seniority in ICU, nurse to patient ratio and personal workload.

In order to reduce practices subjectivity and heterogeneity, we have developed a decision-making tool for physical restraints implementation. This tool is based on objective scales used on a daily basis concerning neurological status (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) and Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU)). Disorientation or delirium can lead to severe incidents by promoting accidental removing of important devices such as arterial of venous line, drains among others. However, physical restraints are recognized as a major cause of delirium and agitation.

Critically ill patients require rigorous evaluation of organ dysfunctions necessitating adequate invasive equipments, with associated risks of unexpected removal or alteration. Such events could urge caregivers to use physical restraints. Based on recent literature, about a third of ICU patients are restrained, and accidental deconditioning is mainly observed within these particular patients.

In addition, three categories of patients have been defined according to the invasive nature of their equipment and therefore according to the risk associated with an unexpected withdrawal. Finally, presence of patient's family and their adherence to its surveillance were also implemented into the tool. Main study objective is to jointly investigate effectiveness and tolerance of a decision-making tool guiding physical restraints use in ICU patients.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Current study has been designed to measure the impact of an original tool intended to guide the decision to use physical restraints in ICU patients. In a multidisciplinary fashion, we have created a decision-making tool based on objective criteria in an attempt to reduce subjectivity that currently exists in this process of physical restraints use. This tool corresponds to a decision tree based on several criteria:

* the RASS (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale) score that assesses patient's state of sedation and agitation. This neurological state could help to determine level of arousal possibly favorizing self-inflicted risks;
* the existence of a delirious state (or delirium), assessed by the CAM-ICU (Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit). This tool is used to detect and assess the presence of a delirium. In the case of a positive CAM-ICU, the patient presents a delirium and may therefore have unsuitable gestures;
* the recent modification of pharmacological-induced sedation allows us to take into account a change in the dosage of infused sedation molecules in order to assess whether the patient may soon find himself in an awakening phase. This transitional phase makes patient's neurological state unstable and can lead to agitation and/or confusion;
* the level of invasive equipment conditioning, defined by the type of device that equips the patient. Three levels of conditioning (C1, C2 and C3) have been defined, ranging from the least to the most harmful in the case of an unexpected removal:

* Level C1 includes peripheral venous catheters, naso-gastric tubes and urinary catheters;
* Level C2 includes endotracheal tube, central and arterial lines, renal replacement catheters, drains: thoracic, encephalic or abdominal; intracranial pressure sensors, Swan-Ganz catheters, redons, PICC (peripherally inserted central catheter) lines and Midlines;
* Level C3 includes veno-venous and veno-arterial ECMO (extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation), intra-aortic counter-pulsion balloons and electro-systolic training probes;
* the presence of patient's family and their adherence to his or her supervision. Families play a key role in patient's care. Their presence might sometimes soothe and reassure the patient. Their adherence and participation to patient's supervision may allow health care team to consider adequate compliance. Regular re-evaluation should then be carried out when they leave patient's room; In order to facilitate the work of caregivers, this decision-making tool has been transcribed into an electronic version that can be accessed online, on a tablet or a computer. Once the above criteria have been filled in, a proposal for whether or not to use physical restraints, as well as main variable criterion for reassessment of this use. This last criterion makes it possible to know the decisive factor that suggested the decision to use restraints or not.

In order to evaluate the impact of this tool on caregivers' decision to use physical restraints, three periods have been planned: a control period in order to evaluate actual practices, a period of training and implementation of the tool, so that each professional is rendered familiar with its use, and finally an intervention period during which the ARBORea tool will be used to suggest physical restraints use.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Critically Ill Intensive Care Unit Delirium Delirium Confusional State Agitation,Psychomotor

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

OTHER

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

ARBORea decision-making tool

After a period of presentation and training on the dedicated decision-making tool (face-to-face, video and paper supports), nurses will be asked to use ARBORéa decision tree. This will be in the form of an electronic file and will give a suggestion of whether or not to use physical restraints. This is based on an algorithm based on specific and mandatory elements (neurological state : RASS (Richmond assessment sedation scale) and CAM-ICU (confusion assessment method-ICU) scores, modification of sedation dosage, equipment levels, presence and adhesion of the family) that will be completed online. ARBORea's suggestion will be collected as well as final caregiver's decision in order to evaluate relevance of the tool. Observations will also be made at least every 8 hours. This period will also be of random duration (stepped wedge)

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

ARBORea decision-making tool

Intervention Type OTHER

Online ARBORea decision-making tool will guide the use of physical restraints in ICU patients based on objective information on neurological status, level of equipment related to critical illness, and patient's family presence and involvement in patient's surveillance.

Subjective physical restraints use

After study presentation and required data collection description, nurses will complete elements related to ARBORea's tool variables, and inform their actual practices of physical restraints use, at least every 8 hours. ARBORea data concern patient's neurological state (RASS and CAM-ICU scores) and changes in sedation doses. The conditioning will then be filled in to stratify the risk incurred. Pain management will be notified. Finally, the presence and involvement of the families will be collected. Other data, relating to working conditions of the nurses will be collected: nurse to patient ratio, special and time consuming events (new patient admission, in ICU emergencies, need to conduct a patient to CT-scan facility or operative room, change of patient's equipment). Nurse seniority in ICU will be specified. Incidents that have occurred (fall, self-injury, removal of a level C2 equipment). The random duration of this control period will be determined by stepped wedge sequencing.

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

ARBORea decision-making tool

Online ARBORea decision-making tool will guide the use of physical restraints in ICU patients based on objective information on neurological status, level of equipment related to critical illness, and patient's family presence and involvement in patient's surveillance.

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patient, male or female, over 18 years of age, hospitalized in ICU for at least 48 hours.
* Consent to participate in the patient's study or authorization to carry out the research collected from the designated trustworthy person (failing this, a family member, or failing this, a close and stable relation with the person concerned) according to the modalities described in Title II of the book of the First Public Health Code. If no relative is present, the patient may be included on the advice of the investigator (article L. 1111-6). A consent form for continuation of the study and use of the data will then be signed by the patient if and when the patient is again conscious and lucid, or if the patient is unable to express consent, authorization to continue the research will be obtained from the designated trusted person.
* Patient covered by a social security system.

Exclusion Criteria

* Predictable and uninterrupted maintenance of deep sedation throughout the duration of the stay, due to the seriousness of the lesions, from the moment the patient is admitted to the intensive care unit.
* Lack of predictable remission of a severe coma present on admission to intensive care.
* Refusal to participate by the patient, or by the trusted person contacted by default.
* Patient with DNR (do not resuscitate) orders.
* Patient under legal protection.
* Patient already included in the protocol during another stay in resuscitation
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Périne Vidal

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

CHU de Clermont-Ferrand

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

CH Henri Mondor

Aurillac, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier d'Avignon

Avignon, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Hôpital Nord Franche-Comté

Belfort, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer Jean-Perrin

Clermont-Ferrand, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand

Clermont-Ferrand, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Dijon

Dijon, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier du Puy en Velay

Le Puy-en-Velay, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire - Hospices Civils de Lyon - Hôpital Edouard Herriot

Lyon, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille - La Timone

Marseille, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier de Montluçon

Montluçon, , France

Site Status WITHDRAWN

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier

Montpellier, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier Moulins-Yzeure

Moulins, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice

Nice, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Hôpital de la Pitié Salpétrière

Paris, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne

Saint-Etienne, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier de Salon-de-Provence

Salon-de-Provence, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

CH de Saint Malo

St-Malo, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Strasbourg - Réa Chirurgicale

Strasbourg, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Strasbourg -MIR

Strasbourg, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Centre Hospitalier de Vichy

Vichy, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

France

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Lise Laclautre

Role: CONTACT

+33 4 73 754963

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Simon CLUSE

Role: primary

Marie BONNEFOY

Role: primary

Nahila HIMER

Role: primary

Frédéric MOITRON

Role: primary

Périne VIDAL

Role: primary

Christina TERON

Role: primary

Isabelle ROURE

Role: primary

Florian DEGIVRY

Role: primary

Jeremy Bourenne

Role: primary

Jeanne BOYER

Role: primary

Emilie DAVID

Role: primary

Nathalie REVEL

Role: primary

Claire FAZILLEAU

Role: primary

Sandrine PIOT

Role: primary

Mélika BERRAHAL

Role: primary

Maureen BOTHOREL

Role: primary

Coralie RIEHL

Role: primary

Sylvie L'HOTELLIER

Role: primary

Estelle MANTIN

Role: primary

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Vidal P, Lambert C, Pereira B, Martinez R, Araujo L, Yakhni M, Rolhion C, Morand D, Cosserant S, Genes I, Godet T, Barage A; ARBORea Collaborative group. Stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to assess the impact of a decision support tool for physical restraint use in intensive care units (ARBORea Study): a study protocol. BMJ Open. 2025 May 21;15(5):e085674. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085674.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 40398949 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

PHRIP 2019 VIDAL

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Recruitment Maneuver After Intubation
NCT01014299 COMPLETED PHASE4
Early Mobilization in the ICU
NCT01777035 COMPLETED NA