Recovery programme for ICU survivors has no effect on relatives' quality of life: Secondary analysis of the RAPIT-study

How and when post intensive care syndrome-family is measured: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Family members of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients can experience mental health difficulties. These are collectively described as Post Intensive Care Syndrome-Family (PICS-F). There are no standardised outcome measures to benchmark the impact of PICS-F. This scoping review aimed to map and characterise interventions, outcomes, and outcome instruments related to PICS-F.

METHODS

Eight databases were searched in June 2023: Pubmed, CINAHL, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo, AMED, Emcare and Cochrane. The grey literature was also searched. Studies published after 2012 related to PICS-F were included. Search strategy included: (Population) family members of adult ICU patients, (Concept) PICS-F, (Context) ICU settings. Frequency analysis of outcomes was performed, and instruments were mapped to describe the characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the identified 4848 records, 46 papers representing 44 unique studies met the inclusion criteria and were retained for analysis. In total, 8008 family members were represented across 15 countries in four continents worldwide. The number of studies reporting PICS-F interventions increased rapidly over the past 12 years and were performed in ICUs treating mixed conditions. Studies were randomised control trials (n = 33), before-and-after design (n = 6) and non-randomised trials (n = 5). A total of 18 outcome instruments were used measuring predominantly anxiety, with complicated grief measured only once. The identified instruments were mostly validated for clinical and disease specific populations but not validated among relatives of ICU patients.

CONCLUSION

There is a plethora of instruments measuring PICS-F outcomes. No core outcome set is currently available for PICS-F. To reduce heterogeneity of how PICS-F is measured, a core outcome set with validated measurements is recommended to allow benchmarking and to document the impact of PICS-F interventions.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Recognising PICS-F symptoms and understanding how to assess them could help clinicians to develop interventions to improve family outcomes. Validated instruments are needed to evaluate these interventions.

Postintensive care syndrome family: A comprehensive review

Families of critically ill patients are predisposed to tremendous burdens when their relatives are admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Postintensive care syndrome family (PICS-F) can be described as a devastated life, encompassing psychological, physical, and socioeconomical burdens that begin with the emotional impact experienced by the family when the patient is admitted to the ICU. PICS-F was primarily proposed as a clinically significant psychological impairment, but it needs to be extended beyond the psychological impairment of the family to include physical and socioeconomical impairments in the future. The prevalence of physiological problems including depression, anxiety and post-traumatic syndrome is 20-40%, and that of non-physiological problems including fatigue is 15% at 6 months after the ICU stay. Assessment of PICS-F was frequently conducted at 3- or 6-month points, although the beginning of the evaluation was based on different assessment points among each of the studies. Families of ICU patients need to be given and understand accurate information, such as the patient's diagnosis, planned care, and prognosis. Prevention of PICS-F requires a continuous bundle of multifaceted and/or multidisciplinary interventions including providing a family information leaflet, ICU diary, communication facilitators, supportive grief care, and follow-up, for the patient and families from during the ICU stay to after discharge from the ICU. This is the first comprehensive review of PICS-F to address the concept, risk factors, assessment tools, prevalence, and management to prevent PICS-F to facilitate acute care physicians' understanding of PICS-F.

The Impact of Randomized Family-Centered Interventions on Family-Centered Outcomes in the Adult Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review

Objective: To review the literature for randomized family-centered interventions with family-centered outcomes in the adult intensive care unit (ICU). Data Sources: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library database from inception until February 2023. Study Selection: We included articles involving randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the adult critical care setting evaluating family-centered interventions and reporting family-centered outcomes. Data Extraction: We extracted data on author, year of publication, setting, number of participants, intervention category, intervention, and family-centered outcomes. Data Synthesis: There were 52 RCTs included in the analysis, mostly involving communication and receiving information (38%) and receiving care and meeting family member needs (38%). Nearly two-thirds of studies (N = 35; 67.3%) found improvements in at least 1 family-centered outcome. Most studies (N = 24/40; 60%) exploring the impact of family-centered interventions on mental health outcomes showed improvement. Improvements in patient-centered outcomes (N = 7/17; 41%) and healthcare worker outcomes (N = 1/5; 20%) were less commonly found. Conclusions: Family-centered interventions improve family-centered outcomes in the adult ICU and may be beneficial to patients and healthcare workers.

Impact of the person-centred intervention guided self-determination across healthcare settings-An integrated review

AIM

To review the evidence of the existing literature on the impact of guided self-determination across methodologies in different healthcare settings.

METHODS

An integrated five-stage review.

RESULTS

Forty-five eligible papers were included. Guided self-determination was applied in full- or small-scale, or combined with another intervention or approach in different healthcare settings handling, for example diabetes, stroke survivorship, schizophrenia, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and medical disorder, gynaecological and breast cancer, endometriosis, persons with chronic pain, persons in haemodialysis and intensive care survivors. The included studies covered 12 randomised trials, 26 qualitative and seven papers of different methodology. A statistically significant effect was found in three trials. Six main themes describe the qualitative findings across papers on patients: (1) Guided self-determination reduces disease-related loneliness, (2) Insight enables integration of life and disease, (3) Reflection sheets-appreciated but challenging tool to prompt insights and person-specific knowledge, (4) New person-specific knowledge enables person-centred support, (5) Feeling seen and believed in a new and trusted relationship and (6) Exchange of knowledge enables the development of life skills. Four themes describe the healthcare professionals' experience: (1) Change of usual practice-a decision from above, (2) A new role-unlearning previous behaviour and need for support, (3) Reflection sheets as facilitators and barriers and (4) Discovering the benefits of changing to a person-centred approach.

CONCLUSION

Overall, guided self-determination proved to have a great impact on patient important outcomes and was useful and well-accepted by the majority of patients and healthcare professionals. Albeit guided self-determination is not a 'one size fits all' method. Continuous training and supervision of professionals are a necessary mean when implementing guided self-determination to enhance adoption and sustainability in clinical practice.

Care Bundles plus Detailed Nursing on Mortality and Nursing Satisfaction of Patients with Septic Shock in ICU

Objective

To evaluate the effect of care bundles combined with detailed nursing on the mortality and nursing satisfaction of patients with septic shock in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

Ninety patients with septic shock in the ICU admitted to our hospital from April 2019 to April 2020 were recruited and assigned to an experimental group and a control group via the random table method, with 45 cases in each group. The control group adopted conventional nursing, and the experimental group received care bundles combined with detailed nursing. The nursing effect, satisfaction, and mortality of the two groups were compared. The “Glasgow Coma Scale” (GCS) was used to evaluate the coma of the patients, the “Coma Recovery Scale” (CRS-R) was used to assess the state of consciousness of the patients, and the “Hospital Anxiety and Depression” (HAD) scale was used to evaluate the patient's emotional status before and after the intervention.

Results

The experimental group showed a significantly higher nursing efficiency and better nursing satisfaction than the control group (P < 0.05). Lower mortality was found in the experimental group in contrast to the control group (P < 0.05). The experimental group had higher GCS scores and CRS-R scores and lower HAD scores than the control group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Care bundles plus detailed nursing for patients with septic shock in the ICU improve the nursing effect and nursing satisfaction, reduce the mortality rate, and mitigate the clinical symptoms of patients, which shows great potential in clinical application and promotion.

Nursing interventions to cover patients' basic needs in the intensive care context - A systematic review

AIM

To examine the content, theoretical frameworks and effectiveness of nursing interventions utilizing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the intensive care unit (ICU).

DESIGN

A systematic review and narrative synthesis following the guidelines of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis checklist.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SweMed and Cochrane controlled trials register (CENTRAL) databases for studies evaluating interventions primarily delivered by nurses in the ICU. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction and risk of bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included, whereas only seven studies used a theoretical framework. The interventions were heterogeneous in content, duration and choice of PROMs. Outcomes were related to covering patients' and families' basic needs, described by Henderson as essential functions of nursing. Several studies reported positive intervention effects, and nurses' communication and psychosocial care were considered essential components of nursing interventions in the ICU.

Making Family-Centered Care for Adults in the ICU a Reality

Despite the value of family-centered care (FCC) in intensive care units (ICUs), this approach is rarely a reality in this context. This article aims to increase the likelihood that ICU-based care incorporates best practices for FCC. Consistent with this goal, this article begins by overviewing FCC and its merits and challenges in ICUs. It then offers a systemic framework for conceptualizing FCC in this challenging environment, as such a model can help guide the implementation of this invaluable approach. This systemic framework combined with previous guidelines for FCC in the ICU are used to inform the series of recommended best practices for FCC in the ICU that balance the needs and realities of patients, families, and the interprofessional healthcare team. These best practices reflect an integration of the existing literature and previously published guidelines as well as our experiences as healthcare providers, family members, and patients. We encourage healthcare leaders and interprofessional ICU healthcare teams to adopt these best practices and modify them for the specific healthcare needs of the patients they serve and their families.

Can a Dyadic Resiliency Program Improve Quality of Life in Cognitively Intact Dyads of Neuro-ICU Survivors and Informal Caregivers? Results from a Pilot RCT

BACKGROUND

Neuro-ICU hospitalization for an acute neurological illness is often traumatic and associated with heightened emotional distress and reduced quality of life (QoL) for both survivors and their informal caregivers (i.e., family and friends providing unpaid care). In a pilot study, we previously showed that a dyadic (survivor and caregiver together) resiliency intervention (Recovering Together [RT]) was feasible and associated with sustained improvement in emotional distress when compared with an attention placebo educational control. Here we report on changes in secondary outcomes assessing QoL.

METHODS

Survivors (n = 58) and informal caregivers (n = 58) completed assessments at bedside and were randomly assigned to participate together as a dyad in the RT or control intervention (both 6 weeks, two in-person sessions at bedside and four sessions via live video post discharge). We measured QoL domain scores (physical health, psychological, social relations, and environmental), general QoL, and QoL satisfaction using the World Health Organization Quality of Life Abbreviated Instrument at baseline, post treatment, and 3 months' follow-up. We conducted mixed model analyses of variance with linear contrasts to estimate (1) within-group changes in QoL from baseline to post treatment and from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up and (2) between-group differences in changes in QoL from baseline to post treatment and from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up.

RESULTS

We found significant within-group improvements from baseline to post treatment among RT survivors for physical health QoL (mean difference 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-3.06; p = 0.012), environmental QoL (mean difference 1.29; 95% CI 0.21-2.36; p = 0.020), general QoL (mean difference 0.55; 95% CI 0.13-0.973; p = 0.011), and QoL satisfaction (mean difference 0.87; 95% CI 0.36-1.37; p = 0.001), and those improvements sustained through the 3-month follow-up. We found no significant between-group improvements for survivors or caregivers from baseline to post treatment or from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up for any QoL variables (i.e., domains, general QoL, and QoL satisfaction together).

CONCLUSIONS

In this pilot study, we found improved QoL among survivors, but not in caregivers, who received RT and improvements sustained over time. These RT-related improvements were not significantly greater than those observed in the control. Results support a fully powered randomized controlled trial to allow for a definitive evaluation of RT-related effects among dyads of survivors of acute brain injury and their caregivers.

Interventions in Post-Intensive Care Syndrome-Family: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Data show that family members of ICU patients may have high levels of anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorders, and/or complicated grief. This was previously referred to as post-intensive care syndrome-family. We systematically review randomized controlled trials for post-intensive care syndrome-family.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic research in databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINHAL for articles published between January 2000 and October 2019).

STUDY SELECTION

Interventions in randomized controlled trials for post-intensive care syndrome-family in relatives of adult ICU patients.

DATA EXTRACTION

Review, quality assessment, and risk assessment for bias of eligible publications were performed along recommended guidelines for each investigation. Quality assessment graded studies into "strong" (n = 5), "moderate" (n = 4), and "weak" (n = 2).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Out of 2,399 publications, 11 investigations were found eligible (3,183 relatives of ICU patients). Studies addressed interventions during ICU stay (n = 6), during the post-ICU period (n = 4), or both (n = 1). Two studies included relatives of dying/deceased patients. One study implemented end-of-life conferences and showed reduced prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (45% vs 69%; p = 0.01), anxiety (45% vs 67%; p = 0.02), and depression (29% vs 56%; p = 0.003). Family conferences with a physician and proactive participation of a nurse reduced anxiety-scores (p = 0.01) without reducing anxiety prevalence (33.3% vs 52.3%; p = 0.08). Other studies failed to improve symptoms or reduce prevalence of post-intensive care syndrome-family. Interestingly, condolence letters may even increase prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (52.4% vs 37.1%; p = 0.03). Meetings without the presence of ICU physicians were shown to increase Impact of Event Scale-Revised scores (25.9 vs 21.3; p = 0.0495).

CONCLUSIONS

Only few data are available on interventions for post-intensive care syndrome-family. It appears that proactive communication and provision of information seems pivotal for post-intensive care syndrome-family treatment. Interestingly, some interventions may even worsen post-intensive care syndrome-family. In the light of the relevance of post-intensive care syndrome-family in daily ICU care, more high-quality data seems urgently needed.

Physician and Nurse Research in Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Units

BACKGROUND

Although clinical care is multidisciplinary, intensive care unit research commonly focuses on single-discipline themes. We sought to characterize intensive care unit research conducted by physicians and nurses.

METHODS

One hundred randomly selected reports of clinical studies published in critical care medical and nursing journals were reviewed.

RESULTS

Of the 100 articles reviewed, 50 were published in medical journals and 50 were published in nursing journals. Only 1 medical study (2%) used qualitative methods, compared with 9 nursing studies (18%) (P = .02). The distribution of quantitative study designs differed between medical and nursing journals (P < .001), with medical journals having a predominance of cohort studies (29 articles [58%]). Compared with medical journal articles, nursing journal articles had significantly fewer authors (median [interquartile range], 5 [3-6] vs 8 [6-10]; P < .001) and study participants (94 [51-237] vs 375 [86-4183]; P < .001) and a significantly lower proportion of male study participants (55% [26%-65%] vs 60% [51%-65%]; P = .02). Studies published in medical journals were much more likely than those published in nursing journals to exclusively involve patients as participants (47 [94%] vs 25 [50%]; P < .001). Coauthorship between physicians and nurses was evident in 14 articles (14%), with infrequent inclusion of authors from other health care disciplines.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician research and nurse research differ in several important aspects and tend to occur within silos. Increased interprofessional collaboration is possible and worthwhile.

Do health care professionals worry about delirium? Relatives' experience of delirium in the intensive care unit: A qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

In intensive care units, there is a high incidence of delirium, which relates to the risk of complications. Engagement of relatives is an acknowledged part of handling delirium, but knowledge of relatives' perspectives is lacking.

AIM

To explore relatives' experiences of delirium in the critically ill patient admitted to an intensive care unit.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A qualitative design with a phenomenological approach. Semi-structured interviews with eleven relatives of critically ill patients who had delirium during admission to the intensive care unit.

SETTING

An intensive care unit in Denmark.

FINDINGS

Three categories emerged: 'Delirium is not the main concern', 'Communication with health-care professionals is crucial', and 'Delirium impacts on relatives'. Relatives had a lack of knowledge of delirium. Symptoms of delirium were thought of as a natural consequence of critical illness and seemed to be a secondary problem. Health-care professionals did not talk about delirium and information was requested. Delirium and the manifestation of it was experienced in different ways and brought different ways of coping.

CONCLUSION

Findings give a new insight into relatives' experience of delirium in the intensive care unit. Relatives need more information to better understand delirium. Future research must investigate the potential in helping relatives to cope with delirium, to the benefit of both patient and relatives.