A systematic scoping review and interpretive ethical synthesis of ethical decision-making about physical restraints for older adults in Confucian-influenced care contexts
AIM: This study aims to map and interpret the evidence on ethical decision-making in the use of physical restraints for older adults, with particular attention to Confucian-influenced family-centred care contexts and comparative international evidence. DESIGN: This study applied a systematic scoping review design combined with an interpretive ethical synthesis. METHODS: The review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute approach to scoping reviews and reported with reference to PRISMA principles. Medline/PubMed, CINAHL Plus, CNKI, Google Scholar and ResearchGate were searched for English and Chinese literature published from 1 January 2015 to 30 September 2025. Searches combined terms for physical restraint, older adults, decision-making, ethics, family/proxy decision-making and Confucian or filial-piety contexts. Of 757 records identified, 526 records remained after duplicate removal, 46 full-text reports were assessed, and eight studies were included. Because the evidence base combined qualitative, quantitative and review studies, findings were integrated through a staged interpretive ethical synthesis. Empirical findings were first coded descriptively, then compared across evidence types, and finally interpreted through bioethical concepts including autonomy, relational autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, dignity, substituted judgement, vulnerability and culturally situated family responsibility. Primary empirical studies were given greater analytic weight than review articles, which were used mainly for conceptual contextualisation. RESULTS: Four analytically linked themes were identified: contextual determinants of restraint decisions in care settings; balancing autonomy, relational autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence; nurses' ethical dilemmas and moral distress; and family or proxy decision-making shaped by substituted judgement, vulnerability, filial responsibility and culturally situated expectations of care.
Authors
- Yuanyuan Tao (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4627-3161)
- Xiaoyan Feng (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9572-6119)
- 商丽云 (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5258-1088)
- Hongjun Zhu
Institutions
- Soochow University (CN)
- First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University (CN)
Publication Details
- Journal
- BMC Medical Ethics
- Published
- 2026-06-17
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-026-01530-3
- Primary Topic
- Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00