Canadian Nursing Home Restraint Use: World’s Highest
Posted by Kim on March 23rd, 2009 / 
Print This Post
Our neighbors to the north seem to rely on restraints much more than we do.
Canadian nursing homes are world leaders in confining their elderly residents with physical restraints, despite years of evidence that indicate such measures bring a host of negative side effects, a new study suggests.
Canadian homes and chronic-care hospitals used belts and other restraints on almost a third of residents: more than triple the rate in the United States and higher than the three other countries surveyed, the U. S.-led study found.
The figures are lower than a decade earlier, but suggest nevertheless that Canada should consider adopting the kind of strict nursing home legislation that has improved care in the United States, says a Canadian co-author of the research. “We have clear evidence that there is room for improvement,” said John Hirdes, a gerontology professor at the University of Waterloo. “On multiple levels, physical restraint leads to poor outcomes for elderly people.”
I remember when I first starting working in this field. The nursing home used posey vests, wrist restraints, padded siderails, seat belts, geri chairs tipped so far back it’s occupant didn’t have a chance to get out…it’s different now. We have VERY few situations where the posey devices are used; siderails are history at my facility- beds don’t have them attached- but they do lower to the floor; geri chairs don’t recline nearly as far back. And I must admit that I see much less injuries to the residents. Times have changed here in America, and Canada has some catching up to do in this area.
March 24th, 2009 at 7:26 am
I always thought Canada was way ahead of the US when it comes to health care issues. I’ve read many articles in the past three years that tell me otherwise. This is just another example. Restraint use is a cultural problem for nursing homes. One thing I have seen: Less restraint use does mean a (few) more staff are needed. Not many, but a couple maybe.