Family member presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a survey of US and international critical care professionals

Witnessed resuscitation: beneficial or detrimental?

This article explores the existing literature and discusses the benefits and disadvantages of witnessed resuscitation for health professionals, relatives, and patients themselves. Keywords "witnessed resuscitation," "patient perspective," "health professionals," and "resuscitation room" were entered into MEDLINE, Medscape, and Science Direct databases. The issue of witnessed resuscitation, along with the benefits and disadvantages of its implementation, is discussed widely with increasing controversy among health professionals. Many authors accept the existence of benefits of witnessed resuscitation, but they each have reservations on certain aspects of the practice. Although witnessed resuscitation has demonstrable benefits, the dearth of research literature on the subject makes it difficult to come to a concrete conclusion about its value in practice. More studies are needed focusing on the impact of witnessed resuscitation on staff, family members, and patients. Larger sample sizes are needed in future studies, and studies are needed in which geographical, cultural, religious, and sociological factors are taken into consideration.

The introduction of family presence evidence-based practice into a baccalaureate nursing curriculum

The topic of family presence (FP) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation or invasive procedures has recently received attention and debate among healthcare professionals due to pioneering research in this field. Studies completed have included family perspectives on family presence, patients' feelings on family presence, and healthcare providers' views on family presence. Two key areas found to correlate with family presence acceptance among healthcare providers are education and experience. Senior nursing students in one baccalaureate program were introduced to this topic during a 3-hour class on death and dying. Comparisons between pretest and posttest scores revealed an increase in the acceptance of family presence as a priority in nursing care of the critically ill.

Relatives' presence in connection with cardiopulmonary resuscitation and sudden death at the intensive care unit

Within Norwegian intensive care units it is common to focus on the needs of the next of kin of patients undergoing end-of-life care. Offering emotional and practical support to relatives is regarded as assisting them in the initial stages of their grief process. It has also become usual to encourage relatives to be present at the time of death of close relatives. How can dignified end-of-life care coexist with the sometimes turbulent and dramatic character of intensive care in the highly technological environment of intensive care units? This paper describes a case study based on an incident that took place at the intensive care unit (ICU) of Trondheim University Hospital, Norway, in which the relatives of a newly deceased patient voiced unusually strong dissatisfaction with the way they were excluded in connection with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The next of kin's criticism highlights an important paradox as well as a degree of inconsistency in lifesaving and end-of-life care at the ICU. I argue that an investigation of the multiple identities within medical practice can illuminate the potential for clashes between lifesaving and end-of-life care, as described and analysed in this paper.

Should family members be present during cardiopulmonary resuscitation? A review of the literature

During resuscitation, family members are often escorted out of the room for fear of immediate and long-term consequences to the family, the patient, and the physician. However, mounting evidence suggests that family presence during resuscitation could, in fact, be beneficial. The Emergency Nurses Association and the American Heart Association endorse family-witnessed resuscitation and the development of hospital policies to facilitate this process. However, the opinions on family-witnessed resuscitation vary widely, and few hospitals in the United States have developed formal policies on the presence of families during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In this article, we review the current status of family-witnessed resuscitation and provide recommendations on the development of hospital policies for family-witnessed resuscitation.

Trauma surgeons’ attitude towards family presence during trauma resuscitation: A nationwide survey

OBJECTIVE

Trauma is the foremost cause of death in young patients. Not only the patient but also the family experience the consequences of trauma. Interactions of medical staff with family members in the emergency situation may fail psychological and emotional needs. In this context the concept of family presence (FP) during resuscitation is controversial. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyse the attitude of trauma surgeons towards FP during trauma resuscitation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire concerning beliefs and attitudes towards FP during trauma resuscitation was mailed to level I trauma centres of the Trauma Network of the German Trauma Society (DGU). Statistical difference was determined by Rank-Sum test to analyse ordinal variables, for analysing three groups Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's testing were used. Data are given in mean+/-S.D. or absolute percentage.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was answered by 464 of 545 (85%) trauma surgeons between July 2005 and September 2005. One hundred and sixty seven surgeons (37.9%) already knew about FP, 349 (75.2%) considered it a relevant topic, but 232 (50%) would never allow FP during trauma resuscitation. One hundred and sixty eight surgeons (36.2%) had experience of FP during trauma resuscitation with positive results in 56%. Female respondents tend to be better informed about FP and would promote FP more supportively. Those women with experience with FP reported predominantly positive experiences (87% versus 50%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study investigated the factors affecting physicians' opinions towards FP. Any institutional FP programme will have to address physician objections to be successful, by recommending a well-designed, carefully structured protocol with a designated specially trained staff member to offer the family support and the option of entering the resuscitation room with permission of the staff.

The presence of family members during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: European federation of Critical Care Nursing associations, European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care and European Society of Cardiology Council on Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professions Joint Position Statement

This paper presents the European federation of Critical Care Nursing associations, the European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care, and the European Society of Cardiology Council on Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professions Joint Position Statement on The Presence of Family Members During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.

Emergency Nurses' Current Practices and Understanding of Family Presence During CPR

PURPOSE

To examine emergency nurses' current practices and understanding of family presence during CPR in the emergency department, Cork University Hospital, Republic of Ireland.

METHOD

A quantitative descriptive design was used in the study. A questionnaire developed by ENA was distributed to emergency nurses working in a level I trauma emergency department at Cork University Hospital. The total sample number was 90, including all emergency nurses with at least 6 months' emergency nursing experience.

RESULTS

Emergency nurses often took families to the bedside during resuscitation efforts (58.9%) or would do so if the opportunity arose (17.8%). A high percentage (74.4%) of respondents would prefer a written policy allowing the option of family presence during CPR. The most significant barrier to family witnessed resuscitation (FWR) was conflicts occurring within the emergency team. The most significant facilitator to FWR was a greater understanding of health care professionals on the benefits of FWR to patients and families, indicating the need for educational development.

CONCLUSION

The findings of the study and previously published studies indicate the need for development of written polices and guidelines on the practice to meet the needs of patients, families, and staff by providing consistent, safe, and caring practices for all involved in the resuscitation process. Recommendations of the study include the development of a written policy and an educational programme on the safe implementation and practices of FWR.

Family-member presence during interventions in the intensive care unit: perceptions of pediatric cardiac intensive care providers

OBJECTIVE

Should family members be present during interventions in an ICU? This question is a source of debate among health care providers. We propose to define perceptions and practice regarding family-member presence during ICU interventions from a multidisciplinary group of pediatric cardiac intensive care providers.

METHODS

A 20-question survey was created and distributed to attendees of the 2004 Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Symposium, 1 year after the meeting. Interventions were defined as noninvasive (team rounds), invasive (tracheal intubation, central/arterial line placement, chest tube placement, or pericardiocentesis), or extremely invasive (cardiopulmonary resuscitation).

RESULTS

A total of 211 surveys (145 physicians and 66 nonphysicians) were completed. Of all responders, the majority believe family members have a right to be present during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (75%), team rounds (77%), and invasive procedures (57%). Sixty-five percent of respondents encounter families that frequently request to be present for team rounds. However, the majority of respondents encounter families that rarely request to be present during invasive procedures (69%) and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (73%). Many providers practice in ICUs where family-member presence is allowed; 64% allow family members to attend team rounds. Some of the concerns providers have regarding family-member presence in the ICU include family-member presence causing stress to the provider during invasive procedures along with distractions and nervousness among the team during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The majority of providers predict family-member presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation would not increase medicolegal concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Most respondents, nonphysicians more than physicians, believe that family members have a right to be present during all ICU interventions. The majority of respondents encounter families that frequently request to be present for team rounds. However, the majority of respondents encounter families that rarely request to be present during invasive procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Most respondents believe family-member presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation would not increase medicolegal concerns.

Parent presence during complex invasive procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review of the literature

We conducted a systematic review of the literature on parent presence during complex invasive pediatric procedures and/or resuscitation. We identified 15 studies that met our inclusion criteria. All studies were summarized chronologically according to level of evidence. The studies all demonstrated that parents prefer to have the choice about whether they remain at their child's side during complex invasive procedures and resuscitation, but they also revealed that apprehensions and controversy abound among clinicians regarding this practice. Despite the endorsements of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the recommendations of the American Heart Association, few pediatric institutions have drafted guidelines, conducted clinical education, or committed sufficient staff resources to fully support this practice. We present this review not only to illustrate the various perspectives of parents/guardians, clinicians, and pediatric patients themselves that have been reported to date but also to encourage more research so that the practice can be performed safely and benefit parents, their children, and clinicians alike.

Family experiences during resuscitation at a children's hospital emergency department

INTRODUCTION

Family presence (FP) during resuscitation is a timely and controversial topic. Family members are becoming part of the resuscitation process. Study objectives included: (1) describe experiences of family members whose children underwent resuscitation in a children's hospital emergency department; (2) identify critical information about family experiences to improve circumstances for future families; and (3) assess mental and health functioning of family members.

METHODS

This descriptive, retrospective study involved a 1-hour audio-taped interview of 10 family members using the Parkland Family Presence During Resuscitation/Invasive Procedures Unabridged Family Survey (FS) and investigator-developed questions. Mental and health functioning were assessed using the Brief Symptom Inventory, the Short Form Health Survey version 2, and the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Scale. Seven family members were present during resuscitation, and three were not present.

RESULTS

Five thematic categories were identified: (1) It's My Right to Be There; (2) Connection and Comfort Make a Difference; (3) Seeing is Believing; (4) Getting In; and (5) Information Giving. Family members voiced that it was their right to be present, indicating they had a special connection to the child. Seeing or not seeing the events of the resuscitation affected family members' ability to believe the outcome. Measures of mental and health functioning were similar to population norms.

DISCUSSION

Instituting guidelines that facilitate FP may provide mechanisms to ensure that the needs of patients, family members, and health care providers are met during a stressful event.

Chest compressions by ambulance personnel on chests with variable stiffness: Abilities and attitudes

INTRODUCTION

Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed by professionals is reported to be substandard even with automated corrective feedback. We hypothesised that lack of quality is not due to physical capabilities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty ambulance personnel from the same services where the quality of clinical CPR was investigated, performed two-rescuer CPR with similar corrective feedback for 5min on each of four manikins with different chest stiffness. The personnel also scored their agreement with statements on clinical CPR performance.

RESULTS

All study subjects performed CPR well within Guidelines recommendations on all four manikins with mean compression depth 44+/-3mm, compression rate 101+/-3min(-1), and 7+/-2 ventilations per minute. Three quarters stated that during CPR on patients their personal sense of correct depth and force determined their performance. Fifty-five percent believed that too deep chest compressions could cause serious injury to the patient, and 39% that compressing to Guidelines recommended depth may often result in severe patient injury. A quarter felt that the potential benefits of compressing to the Guidelines depth could not justify the injuries it would cause. Breaking ribs made 54% feel very uncomfortable.

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulance personnel were physically capable of consistently compressing to the Guidelines depth even on the stiffest chest. These laboratory results cannot be directly compared to the clinical out-of-hospital ALS situation, but strongly indicate that the inadequate chest compressions found in our clinical study were not due to lack of physical capability. We speculate that this may at least partly be explained by their fear of causing patient injury and trust in their own opinion of what is the correct compression depth and force in preference to the feedback.

Do family members interfere in the delivery of care when present during invasive paediatric procedures in the emergency department?

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether family members interfere with patient care when present during invasive procedures performed on their children in the ED.

METHODS

A prospective observational study of consecutive cases of procedural sedation of children aged between 12 months and 16 years was conducted between March 2002 and March 2006 in the ED of a secondary-level regional hospital in south-east Queensland. Procedures performed included laceration repair, fracture reduction, foreign body removal and abscess incision and drainage. Parents/primary caregivers were encouraged to stay with their child. A stepwise explanation of the procedure and sedation to be used was undertaken, informed consent obtained and telephone follow up attempted 5-14 days post procedure.

RESULTS

Six hundred and fifty-two patient encounters with parents or primary caregivers present for the procedure were included for a total of 656 procedures: 234 laceration repairs, 250 fracture reductions, 85 foreign body removals, 33 abscess incision and drainages, 14 dislocation reductions and 40 other procedures. Telephone follow up was successful in 65% (424) of cases. The mean age was 6.5 years. Family member interference occurred in one case (0.15%, 95% confidence interval 0-0.73%). In 17 cases (2.68%, 95% confidence interval 2.1-5.9%) family members present expressed concerns about the procedure during the telephone follow up but had not interfered at the time of the procedure. There were no significant differences between the concerned parents at follow up and the study group across key patient variables such as child's age (P = 0.369), weight (P = 0.379), respiratory rate (P = 0.477), sex (P = 0.308), procedure indication (P = 0.308) and airway manoeuvres (P = 0.153).

CONCLUSION

When family members are encouraged to stay for invasive procedures performed on their child, and careful explanation of the procedure, sedation, possible complications, choice of medication for sedation and possible side-effects is undertaken, family member interference is extremely rare.

Attitudes Toward and Beliefs About Family Presence: A Survey of Healthcare Providers, Patients’ Families, and Patients

Background Although some healthcare providers remain hesitant, family presence, defined as the presence of patients’ family members during resuscitation and/or invasive procedures, is becoming an accepted practice. Evidence indicates that family presence is beneficial to patients and their families.

Objectives To describe and compare the beliefs about and attitudes toward family presence of clinicians, patients’ families, and patients.

Methods Clinicians, patients’ families, and patients in the emergency department and adult and neonatal intensive care units of a 300-bed urban academic hospital were surveyed.

Results Surveys were completed by 202 clinicians, 72 family members, and 62 patients. Clinicians had positive attitudes toward family presence but had concerns about safety, the emotional responses of the family members, and performance anxiety. Nurses had more favorable attitudes toward family presence than physicians did. Patients and their families had positive attitudes toward family presence.

Conclusions Family presence is beneficial to patients, patients’ families, and healthcare providers. As family presence becomes a more accepted practice, healthcare providers will need to accommodate patients’ families at the bedside and address the barriers that impede the practice.

Clinical practice guidelines for support of the family in the patient-centered intensive care unit: American College of Critical Care Medicine Task Force 2004–2005

OBJECTIVE

To develop clinical practice guidelines for the support of the patient and family in the adult, pediatric, or neonatal patient-centered ICU.

PARTICIPANTS

A multidisciplinary task force of experts in critical care practice was convened from the membership of the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) to include representation from adult, pediatric, and neonatal intensive care units.

EVIDENCE

The task force members reviewed the published literature. The Cochrane library, Cinahl, and MedLine were queried for articles published between 1980 and 2003. Studies were scored according to Cochrane methodology. Where evidence did not exist or was of a low level, consensus was derived from expert opinion.

CONSENSUS PROCESS

The topic was divided into subheadings: decision making, family coping, staff stress related to family interactions, cultural support, spiritual/religious support, family visitation, family presence on rounds, family presence at resuscitation, family environment of care, and palliative care. Each section was led by one task force member. Each section draft was reviewed by the group and debated until consensus was achieved. The draft document was reviewed by a committee of the Board of Regents of the ACCM. After steering committee approval, the draft was approved by the SCCM Council and was again subjected to peer review by this journal.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 300 related studies were reviewed. However, the level of evidence in most cases is at Cochrane level 4 or 5, indicating the need for further research. Forty-three recommendations are presented that include, but are not limited to, endorsement of a shared decision-making model, early and repeated care conferencing to reduce family stress and improve consistency in communication, honoring culturally appropriate requests for truth-telling and informed refusal, spiritual support, staff education and debriefing to minimize the impact of family interactions on staff health, family presence at both rounds and resuscitation, open flexible visitation, way-finding and family-friendly signage, and family support before, during, and after a death.

The public's attitude and perception concerning witnessed cardiopulmonary resuscitation

OBJECTIVE

For healthcare providers, witnessed cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is controversial. However, little is known about the public's stance on this issue. This study was performed to develop insight concerning the general public's thoughts about witnessed CPR.

DESIGN

A random telephone survey.

SETTING

Rural southwest Pennsylvania.

SUBJECTS

Four hundred and eight respondents, >/=18 yrs old, residing in Conemaugh Health System's Memorial Medical Center's service area.

INTERVENTIONS

: Demographic information was gathered concerning the respondents, who rated their level of agreement with questions concerning witnessed resuscitation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of the respondents, 49.3% desired to be present while CPR is performed on a loved one. Respondents desiring CPR were more apt to believe that significant others have a right to be present during CPR (p = .010) and want significant others present with them while undergoing CPR than those declining CPR (p < .001). Respondents desiring CPR felt more strongly that the presence of family or friends during CPR would benefit the patient (p = .022). The desire to be present in the room with a loved one during CPR did not reach statistical significance (p = .275) between the two groups, nor did the belief that that being present would benefit family and friends (p = .093). Of the respondents, 43% believed that the physician should have the most authority in making decisions about witnessed resuscitation, 40% believed that the patient should have the most authority, and 17% believed that family and friends should have the most authority (p < .001). Those who believed that family and friends should have the most authority were more favorable toward witnessed resuscitation than were those who believed that either the patient or the physician should have the most authority.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers insights into the public's attitude concerning witnessed resuscitation. A large segment of the population desires the presence of significant others during CPR and conversely want to be with loved ones during CPR. Further studies should investigate the public's attitude in more diverse settings, and formal programs to accommodate those who wish to remain together during CPR should be developed.

Care for the adult family members of victims of unexpected cardiac death

More than 300,000 sudden coronary deaths occur annually in the United States, despite declining cardiovascular death rates. In 2000, deaths from heart disease left an estimated 190,156 new widows and 68,493 new widowers. A major unanswered question for emergency providers is whether the immediate care of the loved ones left behind by the deceased should be a therapeutic task for the staff of the emergency department in the aftermath of a fatal cardiac arrest. Based on a review of the literature, the authors suggest that more research is needed to answer this question, to assess the current immediate needs and care of survivors, and to find ways to improve care of the surviving family of unexpected cardiac death victims. This would include improving quality of death disclosure, improving care for relatives during cardiopulmonary resuscitation of their family member, and improved methods of referral for services for prevention of psychological and cardiovascular morbidity during bereavement.

Physician experience with family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in children

OBJECTIVE

Family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in children is an emerging practice. Although many hospitals allow this practice, there is scant research on physician attitudes and opinions and on physician views about training for resident physicians.

DESIGN

Survey method.

SETTING

University and community settings.

PATIENTS

We randomly selected 1,200 pediatric critical care and emergency medicine providers from professional association mailing lists.

INTERVENTION

The providers were mailed up to two written surveys and two reminder cards. The survey consisted of 40 multiple-choice and short-answer questions about demographics, past experiences, and opinions on pediatric family presence.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Of 1,200 surveys mailed, 521 were completed (43.4%) and 73 (6.1%) respondents returned the form declining to participate. More than 99% of respondents were physicians. Four hundred and thirty-three respondents (83%) reported participation in pediatric resuscitation with family members present, with a mean of 15 episodes ever and three episodes within the last year. Of those who had ever participated, more than half thought it was helpful for the family, and two thirds believed that parents wanted the option. Ninety-three percent would allow family presence in some situations. Seventy-four percent believed family presence would be stressful for a resident physician, but nearly 80% believed that residents working with children should be educated in this area.

CONCLUSIONS

Family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in children is not an uncommon experience for health care providers. Most respondents had resuscitated a child with family members present. The majority thought that presence was helpful to parents and that residents should be trained in this practice.

[The presence of family members in the trauma room]

The fate of multiple trauma patients is witnessed by a considerable number of relatives. Although numerous studies report that the patient's course and treatment success are dependent on the family's confidence as well as its clarification over the clinical situation, scientifically based guidelines for contact with relatives in the context of acute care following severe traumatic injuries do not yet exist. The current guidelines of the European Resuscitation Council recommend the concept of "on scene" presence for the integration of the relatives into acute care in situations of circulatory and heart failure, thus recommending the presence of relatives during acute medical care. This article discusses this concept and argues for a possible assignment of management of trauma care for severe and gravely injured patients.

Paediatric critical care nurses' attitudes and experiences of parental presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a European survey

BACKGROUND

Although recent resuscitation guidelines are supportive of family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation literature from the last decade suggests that it is often discouraged, and the subject remains a controversial issue.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the experiences and attitudes of European paediatric critical care nurses about parental presence during the resuscitation of a child.

DESIGN

A survey design was employed.

PARTICIPANTS

A convenience sample of European paediatric critical care nurses was used.

METHODS

A structured questionnaire was used, which incorporated a series of attitude statements that were rated using a 5-point Likert scale. Differences in attitudes were explored in three areas: decision-making, processes and outcomes of resuscitation.

RESULTS

The results from this survey suggest that European paediatric nurses are very supportive of parental presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Only a few nurses reported that their unit had a policy that covered parental presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and most nurses did not support the use of a dedicated nurse to look after the parents during resuscitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with previous studies relating to adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation, paediatric nurses experience family member presence more frequently than adult critical care nurses and appear to be more supportive of relatives' presence. It is recommended that paediatric intensive care units establish local policies that cover parental presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

The relationship between the hospital setting and perceptions of family-witnessed resuscitation in the emergency department

OBJECTIVE

To compare the support for, and perceptions of, family-witnessed resuscitation (FWR) in urban and suburban emergency departments (ED).

METHODS

A convenience sample of ED personnel from two urban and two suburban midwestern hospitals in the United States were surveyed. Survey questions assessed respondents' opinions and experiences regarding the presence of family members during a resuscitation attempt. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics, 95% confidence intervals (CI), and chi2 tests.

RESULTS

There were 218 respondents to the survey (108 urban, 110 suburban) of which the majority (63.3%) were female, and a mean (S.D.) age of 36.9 (10.2). The majority [131 (60.1%)] were health care providers (i.e. physicians, nurses, and physician assistants) while the remainder included support staff (i.e. security, pastoral care, and social workers). Half (50.9%; 95% CI: 44.3-57.6) of all ED personnel felt it was appropriate for an escorted family member to be allowed to be present during a resuscitation attempt. However, ED personnel of urban settings were less likely to support FWR (38.9% urban versus 62.7% suburban; p < 0.001). Likewise, fewer urban than suburban personnel thought that the psychological impact of witnessing a failed resuscitation attempt would be beneficial for a family member (37.6% versus 61.7%; respectively, p = 0.001). Of note, a minority, yet substantial percentage of all ED personnel believed that the practice would increase the potential for malpractice litigation (28.7% urban versus 21.8% suburban; p = 0.242).

CONCLUSION

Overall, there is divided support among ED personnel for FWR. The hospital setting appears to influence this support strongly, as well as the perceived benefit of FWR.

Witnessed resuscitation: A concept analysis

The science and practice of resuscitation is recognised and endorsed on an international level, yet for more than a decade it has appeared in the literature alongside words such as witnessing or witnessed to signify the practice of family presence during a resuscitation attempt. This paper explores the meaning of witnessed resuscitation using the process for concept analysis proposed by Rodgers. The term resuscitation is explored, followed by identification of relevant uses of the concept of witnessed resuscitation. The reader is introduced to conceptual variations that challenge the way in which the concept has become associated with family or relatives presence in the resuscitation room of an accident and emergency department. Conceptual clarity is further enhanced through the identification of references, antecedents and consequences of witnessed resuscitation and by providing a model case of the concept that includes its defining attributes.

Family presence during CPR: a study of the experiences and opinions of Turkish critical care nurses

BACKGROUND

The concern over family witnessed cardiopulmonary resuscitation has been a frequent topic of debate in many countries.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this descriptive study is determine the experiences and opinions of Turkish critical care nurses about family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and to bring this topic into the critical care and the public limelight in Turkey.

METHODS

Study population consisted of critical care nursing staff at four hospitals affiliated with the Ministry of Health, three hospitals affiliated with universities and three hospitals affiliated with Social Security Agency Hospitals. A total of 409 eligible critical care nurses were surveyed using a questionnaire which is consisted of 43 items under 3 areas of inquiry.

RESULTS

None of the hospitals that participated in this study had a protocol or policy regarding family witnessed resuscitation. More than half of the sample population had no experience of family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and none of the respondents had ever invited family members to the resuscitation room. A majority of the nurses did not agree that it was necessary for family members to be with their patient and did not want family members in resuscitation room. In addition, most of the nurses were concerned about the violation of patient confidentiality, had concerns that untrained family members would not understand CPR treatments, would consider them offensive and thereby argue with the resuscitation team. The nurses expressed their concern that witnessing resuscitation would cause long lasting adverse emotional effects on the family members.

CONCLUSION

This study reveals that critical care nurses in Turkey are not familiar with the concept of family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In view of the increasing evidence from international studies about the value of family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation we recommend educational program about this issue and policy changes are required within the hospitals to enhance critical care in Turkey.

Family Presence During Resuscitation: A Critical Review of the Literature

Presence of patients’ families during resuscitation has emerged as an important practice issue, sparking considerable controversy worldwide. Early advocates of allowing patients’ families to be present during resuscitation faced more resistance than did current advocates because the former had little or no scientific research results to support their ideas. In the past 15 years, a number of quantitative studies, especially descriptive surveys, have been conducted. Qualitative researchers have also explored the lived experience of family members present during resuscitation and less commonly the perspectives of patients and healthcare providers. In this review of the literature, the current state of the science is critically reviewed and the ethical-theoretical perspectives of respective researchers and staff participants in the reviewed studies are discussed. Surveys were used to collect data in most studies to date. Limitations of these designs include small convenience samples, low response rates, use of retrospective surveys and the associated potential selection bias, and lack of consistency in survey instruments, factors that make comparison of findings between studies difficult. Recommendations to address the gaps in the current state of knowledge about family members’ presence during resuscitation are discussed. Experimental and qualitative methods are especially needed to investigate the effect of family presence during resuscitation on patients, families, nurses and physicians, and other multidisciplinary staff members.

Family Member Presence for Procedures: The Resident's Perspective

OBJECTIVE

To describe resident acceptance of and comfort with family member presence (FMP) during pediatric invasive procedures and resuscitation in a large, multicenter pediatric residency program. To determine if increased level of training impacts on opinion toward FMP for procedures.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Seventy-six residents of postgraduate levels 1-4 were administered a survey about FMP for procedures. The survey consisted of 4 Likert-scale questions and 1 multiple-choice question of resident acceptance of and comfort with FMP during procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).

RESULTS

Fifty-three residents (70%) responded. Residents were accepting of FMP during procedures, with a mean score of 3.9/5. However, residents were less accepting of FMP presence during CPR, with a mean score of 2.84/5. There was a trend toward increased comfort and acceptance of FMP with increased level of training; however, this was not statistically significant. In our study, nearly one half of residents (45%) reported that their major reservation toward FMP was that resident anxiety could result in procedure or resuscitation failure.

CONCLUSION

The residents in our pediatric training program generally accept FMP for procedures. Residents were less accepting of FMP for CPR than for procedures. Residents most commonly oppose FMP for procedures because they believe this will make them anxious and lead to failure. This information provides insight into the implementation of FMP for procedures in a medical education setting.

A European survey of critical care nurses’ attitudes and experiences of having family members present during cardiopulmonary resuscitation

This paper presents the results of a survey into the experiences and attitudes of 124 European critical care nurses to the presence of family members during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Nurses from mainland Europe were less experienced and less sure about the consequences of relatives witnessing resuscitation than United Kingdom (UK) nurses. Generally, nurses supported the presence of family members, although UK nurses held significantly more positive attitudes than their non-UK counterparts in the areas of decision-making, processes and outcomes of resuscitation. Differences in attitudes are explored in the discussion. On the basis of results from this study, it is recommended that further policy guidance is required.

Witnessing invasive paediatric procedures, including resuscitation, in the emergency department: A parental perspective

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether parents prefer to be present during invasive procedures performed on their children in the ED.

METHODS

A prospective study using a written survey was carried out in the ED of a secondary level regional hospital in south-east Queensland. The survey conducted between August 2003 and November 2003 consisted of parental demographics, seven theoretical paediatric procedural scenarios with increasing level of procedural invasiveness (including resuscitation) and reasons for the decisions of parents to either stay with the child or leave the room. Parents of children with Australasian Triage Scale (ATS) triage category 3, 4 and 5 were surveyed.

RESULTS

Of 573 surveys collected, 553 (96.5%) were completed correctly. The number of parents expressing a desire to be present during a procedure performed on their child was 519 (93.9%) for phlebotomy or i.v. cannulation of an extremity, 485 (87.7%) for nasogastric tube insertion, 461 (83.4%) for lumbar puncture, 464 (83.9%) for urinary catheter insertion, 430 (77.8%) for suprapubic bladder aspiration, 519 (93.4%) during procedural sedation and 470 (85%) during a resuscitation where the possibility existed that their child may die. The most common reason for wanting to be present was to provide comfort to their child (542/98%). The most common reason for not wanting to be present was a parental concern of getting in the way (181/33%).

CONCLUSION

Most parents surveyed would want to be present when invasive procedures are performed on their children in the ED. With increasing invasiveness, parental desire to be present decreased. However, the overwhelming majority of parents would want to be in attendance during procedural sedation or resuscitation.

Family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation

A recent phenomenon in emergency and critical care settings is the presence of family members during resuscitation events. It remains controversial in most institutions, but evidence is increasing that the experience has positive benefits for family members. In this article, the origin of family presence is described and research evidence about the experience is presented. Three case studies are presented to illustrate typical events, including the potential role of the hospital chaplain. Recommendations for implementation are included.

A national survey of Turkish emergency physicians perspectives regarding family witnessed cardiopulmonary resuscitation

We investigated Turkish emergency physicians' views regarding family witnessed resuscitation (FWR) and to determine the current practice in Turkish academic emergency departments with regard to family members during resuscitation. A national cross-sectional, anonymous survey of emergency physicians working in academic emergency departments was conducted. Nineteen of the 23 university-based emergency medicine programs participated in the study. Two hundred and thirty-nine physicians completed the survey. Of the respondents, 83% did not endorse FWR. The most common reasons for not endorsing FWR was reported as higher stress levels of the resuscitation team and fear of causing physiological trauma to family members. Previous experience, previous knowledge in FWR, higher level of training and the acceptance of FWR in the institution where the participant works were associated with higher rates of FWR endorsement for this practice among emergency physicians.

Family presence during pediatric resuscitation: an integrative review for evidence-based practice

Many pediatric health care institutions lack guidelines to address the presence of family members during resuscitation activities. This integrative literature review was used to establish an evidence-based approach that would compliment our institution's philosophy of "family centered care." The evidence supports a partnering with the families: Hospital staff ask families whether they want to be present during life-saving interventions by health care professions. Families want to make the choice, and when they are present during resuscitation efforts, there is less litigation, anxiety, and second-guessing regarding the efforts and competence of the staff providing that care. No literature was found to support beliefs that family member presence is harmful to the family or the institution. A practice policy is provided that respects family choice and presence during life-saving measures in pediatric care facilities.

Family member presence during resuscitation in the emergency department: An Australian perspective

OBJECTIVE

The practice of family member presence during resuscitation in the ED has attracted widespread attention over the last few decades. Despite the recommendations of international organizations, clinical staff remain reluctant to engage in this practice in many EDs. This paper separates the evidence from opinion to determine the current state of knowledge about this practice.

METHODS

A search strategy was developed and used to locate research based publications, which were subsequently reviewed for the strength of evidence providing the basis for recommendations.

RESULTS

The literature was examined to reveal what patients and their family members want; the outcomes of family presence during resuscitation for patients and their family members; staff views and practices regarding family presence during resuscitation. Findings suggest that providing the opportunity to be with their critically ill family member is both important to and beneficial for families, however, disparity in staff views has been identified as a major obstacle to family presence during resuscitation. Examination of published guidelines and staff practices described in the literature revealed consistent elements.

CONCLUSION

Although critics point to the lack of rigour in this body of literature, the current state of knowledge suggests merit in pursuing future research to examine and measure effects of family member presence during resuscitation on patients, family members and healthcare providers.

Family member presence in the pediatric emergency department

Traditionally, family members were excluded from viewing invasive procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the pediatric emergency department. The concept of family-centered care in the emergency department has now become more widespread. Consequently, family member presence during routine invasive procedures such as venipuncture, intravenous cannulation, urethral catheterization, and lumbar puncture has become more accepted. Survey evidence indicates parents' overwhelming desire to be present for invasive procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Healthcare provider opinions about family witnessed resuscitation lack similar uniformity. Variations in approval of witnessed resuscitation are influenced by occupation, level of training and experience, and prior exposure to family member presence practices. Although several organizations formally support family presence policies, citing benefits for grieving relatives, critics point to a lack of rigor in a large body of the research cited to underpin these endorsements. We review the literature from the perspective of pediatric emergency physicians, offer suggestions for family member presence, and provide directions for future study.

Family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and invasive procedures: practices of critical care and emergency nurses

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, patients' families are remaining with them during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and invasive procedures, but this practice remains controversial and little is known about the practices of critical care and emergency nurses related to family presence.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the policies, preferences, and practices of critical care and emergency nurses for having patients' families present during resuscitation and invasive procedures.

METHODS

A 30-item survey was mailed to a random sample of 1500 members of the American Association Of Critical-Care Nurses and 1500 members of the Emergency Nurses Association.

RESULTS

Among the 984 respondents, 5% worked on units with written policies allowing family presence during both resuscitation and invasive procedures and 45% and 51%, respectively, worked on units that allowed it without written policies during resuscitation or during invasive procedures. Some respondents preferred written policies allowing family presence (37% for resuscitation, 35% for invasive procedures), whereas others preferred unwritten policies allowing it (39% for resuscitation, 41% for invasive procedures). Many respondents had taken family members to the bedside (36% for resuscitation, 44% for invasive procedures) or would do so in the future (21% for resuscitation, 18% for invasive procedures), and family members often asked to be present (31% for resuscitation, 61% for invasive procedures).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly all respondents have no written policies for family presence yet most have done (or would do) it, prefer it be allowed, and are confronted with requests from family members to be present. Written policies or guidelines for family presence during resuscitation and invasive procedures are recommended.

Family Presence During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Invasive Procedures: Practices of Critical Care and Emergency Nurses

• Background Increasingly, patients’ families are remaining with them during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and invasive procedures, but this practice remains controversial and little is known about the practices of critical care and emergency nurses related to family presence.

• Objective To identify the policies, preferences, and practices of critical care and emergency nurses for having patients’ families present during resuscitation and invasive procedures.

• Methods A 30-item survey was mailed to a random sample of 1500 members of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses and 1500 members of the Emergency Nurses Association.

• Results Among the 984 respondents, 5% worked on units with written policies allowing family presence during both resuscitation and invasive procedures and 45% and 51%, respectively, worked on units that allowed it without written policies during resuscitation or during invasive procedures. Some respondents preferred written policies allowing family presence (37% for resuscitation, 35% for invasive procedures), whereas others preferred unwritten policies allowing it (39% for resuscitation, 41% for invasive procedures). Many respondents had taken family members to the bedside (36% for resuscitation, 44% for invasive procedure) or would do so in the future (21% for resuscitation, 18% for invasive procedures), and family members often asked to be present (31% for resuscitation, 61% for invasive procedures).

• Conclusions Nearly all respondents have no written policies for family presence yet most have done (or would do) it, prefer it be allowed, and are confronted with requests from family members to be present. Written policies or guidelines for family presence during resuscitation and invasive procedures are recommended.