The nurse recognizes that the difference between a voluntary and an involuntary commitment is what?

Choice A reason: Advancing the catheter further risks perforation or malposition, potentially damaging peritoneal tissues or organs. Slow drainage is often due to positional obstruction or constipation, not catheter depth. This invasive action requires medical orders and imaging confirmation, making it inappropriate as a first step in addressing slow drainage.

Choice B reason: Infusing additional dialysate worsens abdominal distension and does not address slow drainage. It may increase intra-abdominal pressure, causing discomfort or complications like hernia. The issue is outflow obstruction, not insufficient dialysate, so adding more fluid is counterproductive and could exacerbate the client’s condition.

Choice C reason: Aspirating with a syringe is not standard practice and risks introducing infection or damaging the catheter. It does not address underlying causes like positional obstruction or fibrin clots. Medical evaluation or specialized interventions like heparin instillation are needed for persistent drainage issues, making this action inappropriate.

Choice D reason: Repositioning the client facilitates drainage by relieving positional obstructions, such as catheter kinking or omental wrapping, common in peritoneal dialysis. Changing positions (e.g., side-lying or sitting) promotes gravity-assisted flow, reducing abdominal girth and improving exchange efficiency. This non-invasive action is the safest and most effective initial step.

Choice A reason: Releasing the client when behavioral control is achieved aligns with autonomy and beneficence, not nonmaleficence. While it benefits the client, it does not directly address harm prevention, which is the core of nonmaleficence. The focus is on restoring freedom, not specifically ensuring no physical harm during restraint use.

Choice B reason: Explaining release requirements promotes understanding and autonomy but does not directly prevent harm, the focus of nonmaleficence. It supports therapeutic communication but does not address the physical safety risks of restraints, such as skin breakdown or circulation issues, making it less relevant to this principle.

Choice C reason: Applying restraints based on assessment, not attitude, ensures objectivity, aligning with justice and fairness. While this prevents inappropriate restraint use, it is less directly tied to nonmaleficence, which focuses on avoiding harm like injury during restraint application, making it a secondary consideration in this context.

Choice D reason: Assuring restraints do not cause injury directly upholds nonmaleficence, the ethical principle of avoiding harm. Regular checks for skin breakdown, circulation impairment, or nerve damage prevent physical harm, ensuring safety during restraint use, making this action the most aligned with nonmaleficence in a restrained client.