A literature review examining the barriers to the implementation of family witnessed resuscitation in the Emergency Department

Family Presence During Resuscitation: Adaptation and Validation into Spanish of the Family Presence Risk-Benefit Scale and the Self-Confidence Scale Instrument

“…From the health professionals' point of view, some authors point out, as general arguments in favor, that it offers the opportunity to give emotional support to the patient and to be by the side of the loved one, reducing at the same time the anxiety of the relatives. It also allows to follow the events at all times, which facilitates making quick and consensual decisions in situ (4,5) , and enabling a better process of grief (2).…”

“…The arguments to the contrary focus on several aspects, such as that the medical team feels evaluated and analyzed, thus causing them discomfort and pressure (3)(4)(5)(6); the frequency with which lack of knowledge and misinterpretation of procedures by family members give rise to traumas, complaints and fears of a possible interruption of proceedings; and also the limited physical space and legal vacuum, since there are no guidelines in this regard (5,7,8) . Relatives who have witnessed CPR think that it is bene cial for the patient and families, and this opinion is not conditioned by age, education or income, nor by the last will and testament (9).…”

Family witnessed resuscitation and invasive procedures: Patient and family opinions

“…Some studies on FPDR expose benefits and harms, assessing the approach of health professionals, patients, and families. [4][5][6][7] As positive aspects, the following can be highlighted: enabling a faster decisionmaking process, knowing at all times what is happening, 8,9 that the patient receives humane treatment, 10 that they have the right to presence during the interventions carried out on the patient, 2,8 while the disadvantages that were identified are that the medical team feels the pressure of the family; they feel observed and analyzed by the family members 9,11,12 ; the interventions can turn out to be traumatic for the family, both physically and emotionally; ignorance and wrong interpretation of the invasive procedures (blood, chaos, tubes, etc.) [8][9][10] ; and a legal gap, there are no guidelines or implemented protocols.…”

“…2,12 In most of the conclusions of these studies, they recommend designing guidelines and protocols in this regard. [11][12][13][14] In their recommendations, the studies state that the guidelines should be individual for every hospital 15 but two important FPDR conditions must be fulfilled: the first one is that a family support person should be present to control the family reactions, act as a link between the healthcare staff and the family, translate the medical jargon, and explain the procedures. 10,16 It is noteworthy that the publications on the FPDR can vary widely depending on the culture, the religion, and the customs of the countries they come from.…”

Family Presence During Resuscitation: Adaptation and Validation into Spanish of the Family Presence Risk-Benefit Scale and the Self-Confidence Scale Instrument

“…The arguments to the contrary focus on several aspects, such as that the medical team feels evaluated and analyzed, thus causing them discomfort and pressure (5,(7)(8)(9) ; the frequency with which lack of knowledge and misinterpretation of procedures by family members give rise to traumas, complaints and fears of a possible interruption of proceedings; and also the limited physical space and legal vacuum, since there are no guidelines in this regard (8,10,11) . Relatives who have witnessed CPR think that it is bene cial for the patient and families, and this opinion is not conditioned by age, education or income, nor by the last will and testament (12) .…”