Partial liberalization of visiting policies and ICU staff: a before-and-after study

Reappraisal of visiting policies and procedures of patient's family information in 188 French ICUs: a report of the Outcomerea Research Group

Background

The relatives of intensive care unit (ICU) patients must cope with both the severity of illness of their loved one and the unfamiliar and stressful ICU environment. This hardship may lead to post-intensive care syndrome. French guidelines provide recommendations on welcoming and informing families of ICU patients. We questioned whether and how they are applied 5 years after their publication.

Methods

We conducted a large survey among French ICUs to evaluate their visiting policies and how information was provided to patient’s family. A questionnaire was built up by intensivists and nurses. French ICUs were solicited, and the questionnaire was sent to all participating ICUs, for being filled in by the unit medical and/or nursing head. Data regarding the hospital and ICU characteristics, the visiting policy and procedures, and the management of family information were collected.

Results

Among the 289 French ICUs, 188 (65 %) participated. Most ICUs have a waiting room 118/188 (62.8 %) and a dedicated room for meeting the family 152/188 (80.8 %). Of the 188 ICUs, 45 (23.9 %) were opened on a 24-h-a-day basis. In the remaining ICUs, the time period allowed for visits was 4.75 ± 1.83 h (median 5 h). In ICUs where visiting restrictions were reported, open visiting was allowed for end-of-life situations in 107/143 (74.8 %). Children are allowed to visit a patient in 164/188 (87.2 %) regardless of their age in 97/164 (59.1 %) of ICUs. Families received an information leaflet in 168/188 (89.3 %). Information was provided to families through structured meetings in 149/188 (79.2 %) of ICUs at patient admission with participation of nurses and nursing assistants in 133/188 (70.4 %) and 55/188 (29.2 %), respectively. Information delivered to the family was reported in the patient chart by only 111/188 ICUs (59 %). Participation in care was infrequent.

Conclusions

Although French ICUs do not follow the consensus recommendations, slow progress exists compared to previous reports. Implementation of these recommendations is largely needed to offer better welcome and information improvement. Further studies on that topic would enable evaluating remaining obstacles and increasing caregivers’ awareness, both critical for further progresses on that topic.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13613-016-0185-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Analgesia in intensive care medicine]

BACKGROUND

The administration of sedatives and analgesics on the intensive care unit (ICU) is routine daily practice. The correct discrimination between delirium, pain and anxiety or confusion is essential for the strategy and selection of medication. The correct pain therapy and sedation are essential for patient quality of life on the ICU and for the prognosis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article is to present state of the art recommendations on the classification of pain and pain therapy on the ICU.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An online search was carried out in PubMed for publications on the topics of "pain" and "ICU".

RESULTS

Critical care patients are frequently subjected to many procedures and situations which can cause pain. The perception of pain is, among other things, influenced by the degree of orientation, anxiety and the degree of sedation. The administration of analgesics and non-pharmacological approaches are effective in reducing the stress perceived by patients.

DISCUSSION

The main aim is improvement in the awareness of nursing and medical personnel for pain inducers and pain perception in ICU patients. The classification of pain must be made objectively. Therapeutic targets must be defined and in addition to the correct selection of pain medication, non-pharmacological approaches must also be consistently implemented.

[Visitation policy, design and comfort in Spanish intensive care units]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the design and comfort in the Intensive Care Units (ICUs), by analysing visiting hours, information, and family participation in patient care.

DESIGN

Descriptive, multicentre study.

SETTING

Spanish ICUs.

METHODS

A questionnaire e-mailed to members of the Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine, Critical and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC), subscribers of the Electronic Journal Intensive Care Medicine, and disseminated through the blog Proyecto HU-CI.

RESULTS

A total of 135 questionnaires from 131 hospitals were analysed. Visiting hours: 3.8% open 24h, 9.8% open daytime, and 67.7% have 2 visits a day. Information: given only by the doctor in 75.2% of the cases, doctor and nurse together in 4.5%, with a frequency of once a day in 79.7%. During weekends, information is given in 95.5% of the cases. Information given over the phone 74.4%. Family participation in patient care: hygiene 11%, feeding 80.5%, physiotherapy 17%. Personal objects allowed: mobile phone 41%, computer 55%, sound system 77%, and television 30%. Architecture and comfort: all individual cubicles 60.2%, natural light 54.9%, television 7.5%, ambient music 12%, clock in the cubicle 15.8%, environmental noise meter 3.8%, and a waiting room near the ICU 68.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Visiting policy is restrictive, with a closed ICU being the predominating culture. On average, technological communication devices are not allowed. Family participation in patient care is low. The ICU design does not guarantee privacy or provide a desirable level of comfort.

Sharing intimacy in "open" intensive care units

PURPOSE

Opening intensive care units (ICUs) is particularly relevant because of a new Swiss law granting the relatives of patients without decision-making capability a central role in medical decisions. The main objectives of the study were to assess how the presence of relatives is viewed by patients, health care providers, and relatives themselves and to evaluate the perception of the level of intrusiveness into the personal sphere during admission.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a longitudinal and prospective design, qualitative questionnaires were submitted concomitantly to patients, relatives, and health care providers consecutively over a 6-month period. The study was conducted in the 4 ICUs of the public hospitals of Canton Ticino (Switzerland).

RESULTS

The questionnaires collected from patients, relatives, and health care providers were 176, 173, and 134, respectively. The analysis of the answers of 120 patient-relative pairs showed consistent results (P < .0001), whereas those of health care providers were significantly different (P < .0001), regarding both the usefulness of opening ICUs to patient relatives and what was stressful during admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Relatives in these "open" ICUs share a great deal of intimacy with the patients. Their presence and the deriving benefits were seen as very positive by patients and relatives themselves. Skepticism, instead, prevailed among health care providers.