Critically ill patients are often unable to communicate, placing the onus on clinicians in ICUs to engage family members. In the United States, practice has gradually shifted toward including family members in ICU rounds (1). However, the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic dramatically altered hospital care in the United States. For example, early reports suggested many hospitals restricted access to visitors (2). We sought to understand changes to visitation policies and strategies used to communicate with family members because of COVID-19. We identified all hospitals with ICUs in the state of Michigan using the 2018 American Hospital Association annual survey database and by Internet searches. In early April, Michigan's statewide ICU occupancy was 71%, the fifth highest in the United States (3). Within each hospital, an ICU physician or nurse leader from a medical ICU was identified and surveyed over the telephone between April 6, 2020, and May 8, 2020. If the ICU leader was unavailable by telephone, an online survey was conducted. Participants were asked 1) whether their hospital made any changes to its visitation policy; 2) what changes were made; 3) whether their ICU had changed the way it routinely communicated with family members; and 4) what strategies their ICU was using to communicate with family members. x 2 and t tests were used to compare responding and nonresponding hospitals. All tests were two sided, with a P value of less than 0.05 considered significant. This research was deemed to be exempt from review by the University of Michigan Institutional Review Board (HUM00179422). We surveyed 49 out of 89 Michigan hospitals with ICUs (response rate = 55%). Characteristics between responding and nonresponding hospitals were similar (Table 1). All 49 responding hospitals had changes to their visitation policies because of COVID-19 (Figure 1). One hospital (2%) indicated
BACKGROUND: Two out of three family members experience symptoms of posttraumatic stress, depression, or anxiety lasting for months after the ICU stay. Interventions aimed at mitigating these symptoms have been unsuccessful.RESEARCH QUESTION: To understand the emotional experiences of family members of critically ill patients and to identify coping strategies used by family members during the ICU stay.STUDY DESIGN: and Methods: As part of a mixed methods study to understand sources of distress among ICU family members, semistructured interviews were conducted with ICU family members. Family members completed surveys at the time of interview and at 90 days to assess for symptoms of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress.RESULTS: Semistructured interviews and baseline surveys were conducted with 40 ICU family members; 78% of participants (n ¼ 31) completed follow-up surveys at 90 days. At the time of interview, 65% of family members had symptoms of depression, anxiety, or posttraumatic stress. At 90 days, 48% of surveyed family members had symptoms of psychological distress. Three primary emotions were identified among ICU family members: sadness, anger, and fear. A diverse array of coping strategies was used by family members, including problemsolving, information seeking, avoidance/escape, self-reliance, support seeking, and accommodation.INTERPRETATION: This study emphasizes similarities in emotions but diversity in coping strategies used by family members in the ICU. Understanding the relationship between ICU experiences, emotional responses, and long-term psychological outcomes may guide targeted interventions to improve mental health outcomes of ICU family members.
Background Family caregivers often experience psychological distress during a critical care hospitalization, potentially compromising their ability to function effectively in a supportive role. A better understanding of the sources of family caregiver distress is needed to inform strategies to mitigate its development and impact. Objective To explore sources of family caregiver psychological distress during a critical care hospitalization and how caregivers’ experiences may differ by their anxiety level. Methods Forty adult family members of patients receiving mechanical ventilation for more than 72 hours in 2 intensive care units at an academic medical center were interviewed. A qualitative directed content analysis was done. Experiences were compared by anxiety level group, defined using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: anxiety (n = 15), borderline anxiety (n = 11), and low anxiety (n=14). Results Most family members (32%) were adult children; no major demographic differences were noted across anxiety groups. Among caregivers in the anxiety group, salient factors included early unknowns around critical illness, health care team processes, care decisions made, financial and housing concerns, family dysfunction, and new responsibilities. In general, low-anxiety family caregivers did not express their concerns using language of distress but rather expressed emotion and disappointment and often took action to process their concerns. Conclusions Factors influencing family caregiver distress during the critical care stay were wide-ranging and varied by level of anxiety. The findings highlight several key areas and potential interventions to reduce psychological distress, especially among caregivers with anxiety.
Purpose Some hospitals in the United States (US) use intensive care 20 times more than others. Since intensive care is lifesaving for some but potentially harmful for others, there is a need to understand factors that influence how intensive care unit (ICU) admission decisions are made. Methods A qualitative analysis of eight US hospitals was conducted with semi-structured, one-on-one interviews supplemented by site visits and clinical observations. Results A total of 87 participants (24 nurses, 52 physicians, and 11 other staff) were interviewed, and 40 h were spent observing ICU operations across the eight hospitals. Four hospital-level factors were identified that influenced ICU admission decision-making. First, availability of intermediate care led to reallocation of patients who might otherwise be sent to an ICU. Second, participants stressed the importance of ICU nurse availability as a key modifier of ICU capacity. Patients cared for by experienced general care physicians and nurses were less likely to receive ICU care. Third, smaller or rural hospitals opted for longer emergency department patient-stays over ICU admission to expedite interhospital transfer of critically ill patients. Fourth, lack of clarity in ICU admission policies led clinicians to feel pressured to use ICU care for patients who might otherwise not have received it. Conclusion Health care systems should evaluate their use of ICU care and establish institutional patterns that ensure ICU admission decisions are patient-centered but also account for resources and constraints particular to each hospital. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-023-07031-w.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.