THE HARTFORD COURANT INVESTIGATIVE REPORT ON RESTRAINT

 

 

There is NO scientific data to support the supposition that prone restraint is a dangerous procedure when executed properly.  Research that does exist clearly identifies factors such as pre-existing medical condition, intoxication or illegal drugs in their system, psychotrophic drugs in their system, obesity, asthma, undiagnosed heart conditions or inappropriate administration of holds as primary and secondary contributing factors to the tragic deaths.

  • If there are 5,000,000 restraints a year resulting in 100s of saved lives, 1000s of injuries that were prevented and billions of dollars in "saved" workers compensation and tort claims - then restraint use would be viewed as a positive intervention. 

 

HARTFORD COURANT RESTRAINT BREAKDOWN

 

The Hartford Courant is the publication that brought the issue of restraint to national attention in 1998.  We commend the investigative series.  We are dismayed that the Federal government does not think this is a significant enough issue to develop any comprehensive statistical data on the subject. 

1. The Hartford Courant does not specify how many restraints were performed during the 10 year they investigated.  

2. Over the 10 year period, there could have been over 50 million restraints performed.

3. Thousands of people could have been saved from injury or death as a result of using physical intervention.  See our stories page.

4, The Hartford Courant reported 43 restraint-related deaths over a 10 year period or 4 deaths a year. 

Since its report, the number of fatalities has declined and facilities -- up to 90% -- still use or are allowed to use prone restraint.  If there were 50,000,000 restraints performed over a 10 year peiord of time, the fatality rate is less than 1/1,000,000%.

Given the fact that in a NY audit of 17 NY High Schools there were 7,357 violent or disruptive incidents and there are 37,000 high schools and over 130,000 K-12 schools in the United States, 50,000,000 restraints in a 10 year period may be a very conservative number.

5. Of those 43 fatalities, over 1/2 -- or 27 were non-prone or basket-hold (arms criss-crossed in front of the consumer's body) related restraints, and 9 were pile-ons.  So 36 non-prone and pile on fatalities versus 7 prone restraint fatalities.  Seems that facilities and staff not trained in the use of prone restraint are at more of a risk of injuring or killing a person than facilities using prone restraint.  See NDRN's Report on Restraint and Seclusion in schools showing 2 Michigan fatalities.  1 fatalilty occured at a school with a standing only restraint program; the 2nd fatality occured at a school where staff was never trained how to use or do restraint.

6. Antidepressants have a much higher fatality rate reporting 32 fatalities per 10,000.  Aspirin has 76 fatalities per 100,000 annually.  Applying the same standards on everyday activities that the advocates are trying to impose on restraint and prone restraint - driving, walking and aspirin should be outlawed regardless of any corresponding benefit. 

 

What does this tell us:

1. Physical intervention may very well have a very positive cost/benefit ratio where people are protected and saved from catastrophe and injury. 

2. Prone (and supine) restraint are not particularly dangerous and are safer than many if not most daily activities (i.e. driving, walking, biking). 

3. Prone restraint is safer than aspirin. 

4. You are more than 10 times as likely to die by being struck by lightening than being fatally restrained in a prone position.  Lightening statistics.

 

For additional information, email us at: 

Email: Info@thetruthaboutrestraint.com




privacy policy  |  submit a story  |  contact us  |  terms of use  |  disclaimer 
copyright © 2008. All Rights Reserved. The Truth about Prone Restraint