Published Nov 16, 2017
BlueberryFranklin
4 Posts
I work on a spinal rehabilitation unit. Our general working definition of a restraint is one that a patient can't remove on their own; so a seat belt has to be a type that a patient can remove on their own (e.g. an easy release type for a central cord patient who doesn't have good hand control, etc.) .
When inspectors come, our managers want to make sure we're crossing all of our T's and dotting all of our I's, and we were told that people who can't use their hands should have their seat belts off since their inability to unbuckle technically made them restraints. Including patients with a cervical injury who can't move anything below the neck. Does anyone have any resources that discuss why this restraint definition shouldn't exactly apply to patients who can't move? My patient didn't feel safe without his seat belt on, and I agreed with him. He wore it anyway.
canoehead, BSN, RN
6,901 Posts
It seems to me that if the patient verbalizes a desire to have the belt on, it's their choice, and therefore not a restraint.