Visiting Preferences of Patients in the Intensive Care Unit and in a Complex Care Medical Unit

Abstract

• Background Within the challenging healthcare environment are nurses, patients, and patients’ families. Families want proximity to their loved ones, but the benefits of such proximity depend on patients’ conditions and family-patient dynamics.• Objectives To describe patients’ preferences for family visiting in an intensive care unit and a complex care medical unit.• Methods Sixty-two patients participated in a structured interview that assessed patients’ preferences for visiting, stressors and benefits of visiting, and patients’ perceived satisfaction with hospital guidelines for visiting.• Results Patients in both units rated visiting as a nonstressful experience because visitors offered moderate levels of reassurance, comfort, and calming. Patients in the intensive care unit worried more about their families than did patients in the complex care medical unit but valued the fact that visitors could interpret information for the patients while providing information to assist the nurse in understanding the patients. Patients in the intensive care unit were more satisfied with visiting practices than were patients in the complex care medical unit, although both groups preferred visits of 35 to 55 minutes, 3 to 4 times a day, and with usually no more than 3 visitors.• Conclusions These data provide the input of patients in the ongoing discussion of visiting practices in both intensive care units and complex care medical units. Patients were very satisfied with a visiting guideline that is flexible enough to meet their needs and those of their family members.

Physical restraints practice in adult intensive care units in Egypt

“…This may be attributed to the presence of the families with the patients during visiting hours in the afternoon shift, which makes them feel secure and less anxious. This is in agreement with the findings of the study by Gonzalez et al (2004).…”

Needs of adult patients in intensive care units of Estonian hospitals: a questionnaire survey

“…The Needs of Adult Patients in Intensive Care Unit (NAPinICU) questionnaire was developed and used to carry out this study because there was no validated instrument available for measuring ICU patients' needs. The questionnaire was composed based on the theoretical framework developed from the previous literature: (1) studies about the needs of adult patients in ICUs (Hupcey 2000, Hupcey & Zimmerman 2000, Gonzalez et al 2004, Campbell & Rudisill 2006, Fernandez 2006, Godfrey et al 2006, Santana et al 2007, (2) studies of patients' experiences in adult ICUs (Granberg et al 1998, Novaes et al 1999, Russell 1999, Stein-Parbury & McKinley 2000, McKinley et al 2002, Adamson et al 2004, Rattray et al 2004, Roberts & Chaboyer 2004, Granja et al 2005, Johansson & Fjellman-Wiklund 2005, Lö f et al 2006, Magnus & Turkington 2006, Hofhuis et al 2008 and (3) papers about patientcentred care in adult ICUs (McCauley & Irwin 2006, Davidson et al 2007). Using qualitative inductive content analysis (Elo & Kyngäs 2008), eight categories of needs were identified: the needs (1) for physical comfort, (2) to feel safe, (3) to be respected as a unique individual, (4) for emotional support, (5) to be informed, (6) for privacy, (7) to involve family and friends and (8) to be involved in decisionmaking.…”

“…According to the previous studies, the presence of family members and significant others is extremely important to ICU patients. They help patients meet all their important needs: reduce their fear and anxiety, confirm their existence and maintain a sense of identity, constitute a connection to reality, provide security that they are cared for and make patients feel safe (Granberg et al 1998, Russell 1999, Hupcey 2000, McKinley et al 2002, Gonzalez et al 2004. In Estonian ICUs, only about a half of patients considered involving family and friends important.…”

“…They interpret information received from healthcare providers and, in turn, give them information that helps them understand the patient's personality and coping style (Hupcey 2000, Gonzalez et al 2004). Therefore, family involvement and visitation policy should be flexible for patients and their families and be related to the patients' best interest (Gonzalez et al 2004, Campbell & Rudisill 2006, Davidson et al 2007. In Estonian ICUs, visiting is allowed only by mutual agreement with the physician incharge.…”

“…Unfortunately, there are only a few international studies focusing on the needs of adult patients in ICU (Hupcey 2000, Hupcey & Zimmerman 2000, Gonzalez et al 2004, Campbell & Rudisill 2006, Fernandez 2006, Godfrey et al 2006, Santana et al 2007, remarkably more studies describe patients' experiences (Granberg et al 1998, Novaes et al 1999, Russell 1999, Stein-Parbury & McKinley 2000, McKinley et al 2002, Adamson et al 2004, Rattray et al 2004, Roberts & Chaboyer 2004, Granja et al 2005, Johansson & Fjellman-Wiklund 2005, Lö f et al 2006, Magnus & Turkington 2006, Hofhuis et al 2008). The majority of these studies are qualitative and their generalizability is problematic.…”