Witnessed resuscitation by relatives

What the curtains do not shield: A phenomenological exploration of patient-witnessed resuscitation in hospital. Part 1: patients' experiences

Aims

The aim of the study was to explore the experiences of hospital patients who witnessed resuscitation of a fellow patient.

Design

Descriptive phenomenology.

Methods

Patients who witnessed resuscitation were recruited from nine clinical wards in a university hospital in England. Data were collected through face‐to‐face individual interviews. Participants were interviewed twice,in 1 week and 4 to 6 weeks after the resuscitation event. Data were collected between August 2018 and March 2019. Interviews were analysed using Giorgi's phenomenological analysis.

Results

Sixteen patients participated in the first interview and two patients completed follow‐up interviews. Three themes were developed from the patients' interviews. (1) Exposure to witnessing resuscitation: patients who witness resuscitation felt exposed to a distressing event and not shielded by bed‐space curtains, but after the resuscitation attempt, they also felt reassured and safe in witnessing staff's response. (2) Perceived emotional impact: patients perceived an emotional impact from witnessing resuscitation and responded with different coping mechanisms. (3) Patients' support needs: patients needed information about the resuscitation event and emotional reassurance from nursing staff to feel supported, but this was not consistently provided.

Conclusion

The presence of other patients during resuscitation events must be acknowledged by healthcare professionals, and sufficient information and emotional support must be provided to patients witnessing such events. This study generates new evidence to improve patients' experience and healthcare professionals' support practices.

Impact

The phenomenon of patient‐witnessed resuscitation requires the attention of healthcare professionals, resuscitation officers and policymakers. Study findings indicate that witnessing resuscitation has an emotional impact on patients. Strategies to support them must be improved and integrated into the management of in‐hospital resuscitation. These should include providing patients with comprehensive information and opportunities to speak about their experience; evacuating mobile patients when possible; and a dedicated nurse to look after patients witnessing resuscitation events.

Turkish validation of the family presence during resuscitation risk-benefit scale

BACKGROUND

There are no validated tools to examine the risk and benefits of family presence and nurses' self-confidence during resuscitation in Turkey.

AIM

This study aimed to test the validity and reliability of the family presence risk- benefit scale and the family presence self-confidence scale in Turkish as well as its psychometric characteristics.

METHODS

The sample of the study consisted of 427 nurses. The forward-backward translation method was used. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to examine the factor structure and construct validity of the scales. In order to evaluate the time invariances of the scales, the relationship between the scores obtained from the first and second applications was examined using the Pearson correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) value of the family presence risk-benefit scale was found to be 0.876 while the KMO value of the family presence self-confidence scale was found to be 0.927. Positive linear correlations with high levels of significance and respective values of 82.5% and 93.5% were found between the total scores of the family presence risk-benefit and family presence self-confidence scales and their retest scores.

CONCLUSION

The Turkish versions of the family presence during resuscitation risk- benefit scale and the family presence self-confidence scale were found to be valid and reliable tools that could be used to determine the perceptions of nurses regarding the risks and benefits of family presence during resuscitation.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Using the family presence risk-benefit and family presence self-confidence scales, both of which have been tested for validity and reliability in Turkish, the perceptions of intensive care nurses regarding the risks and benefits of family presence during resuscitation can be determined as well as their self-confidence on the subject, making the development of policies on the subject possible.

Witnessed resuscitation: A concept analysis

BACKGROUND

The advance in the practice of resuscitation is globally recognised and fully sanctioned in scientific world. However, practicing family presence during resuscitation, also known as witnessed resuscitation, is yet to be endorsed by healthcare professionals. Many professional nursing and physician organisations have endorsed the practice of witnessed resuscitation by issuing guidelines. These organisations support family presence during resuscitation due to the research proving its benefit for patients and families.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the concept of witnessed resuscitation.

METHOD

A concept analysis was undertaken using Rodger's (2000) evolutionary method.

FINDINGS

The concept analysis suggests that witnessed resuscitation refers to the presence of a family member or relative during a resuscitation procedure, mostly in emergency and complex critical care areas. The defining attributes are family centred care approach, exercising patients and family rights and autonomy in end of life care decisions and involvement of family as active and passive observers during a resuscitation event.

CONCLUSION

Clarity surrounding witnessed resuscitation will guide the development of a conceptual framework, expand nursing knowledge and identify the research required to advance understanding of witnessed resuscitation in practice.

Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Family-witnessed Resuscitation of Emergency Department Patients

Introduction

Family presence during emergency resuscitations is increasingly common, but the question remains whether the practice results in psychological harm to the witness. We examine whether family members who witness resuscitations have increased post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms at one month following the event.

Methods

We identified family members of critically ill patients via our emergency department (ED) electronic health record. Patients were selected based on their geographic triage to an ED critical care room. Family members were called a median of one month post-event and administered the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), a 22-item validated scale that measures post-traumatic distress symptoms and correlates closely with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Family members were placed into two groups based on whether they stated they had witnessed the resuscitation (FWR group) or not witnessed the resuscitation (FNWR group). Data analyses included chi-square test, independent sample t-test, and linear regression controlling for gender and age.

Results

A convenience sample of 423 family members responded to the phone interview: 250 FWR and 173 FNWR. The FWR group had significantly higher mean total IES-R scores: 30.4 vs 25.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], −8.73 to −0.75; P<.05). Additionally, the FWR group had significantly higher mean score for the subscales of avoidance (10.6 vs 8.1; 95% CI, −4.25 to −0.94; P<.005) and a trend toward higher score for the subscale of intrusion (13.0 vs 11.4; 95% CI, −3.38 to .028; P = .054). No statistical significant difference was noted between the groups in the subscale of hyperarousal (6.95 vs 6.02; 95% CI, −2.08 to 0.22; P=.121). All findings were consistent after controlling for age, gender, and immediate family member (spouse, parent, children, and grandchildren).

Conclusion

Our results suggest that family members who witness ED resuscitations may be at increased risk of PTSD symptoms at one month. This is the first study that examines the effects of family visitation for an unsorted population of very sick patients who would typically be seen in the critical care section of a busy ED.

The witness of the patient’s relatives increases the anxiety of the physician, but decreases the anxiety of the relatives of the patient

Background:

We generally keep relatives out of the area while a critical intervention so they cannot observe the management. Recent studies recommend witnessing of the resuscitation by arguing that it supports the patient’s relatives’ beliefs that everything that could be done had been done.

Objective:

We investigated the influence of family witness on the anxiety of patients’ relatives and on the healthcare team.

Methods:

This study was planned as a prospective observational study. The critical patients who were managed in the resuscitation room with or without intubation were included in the study. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory survey form was given to patients’ relatives. Healthcare providers were given a survey, including a visual analog scale of anxiety.

Results:

The mean visual analog scale score of healthcare providers was 4.37 ± 2.5. The mean visual analog scale score of allied health personnel was similar to resident doctors but lower than consultant doctors. The anxiety of healthcare providers was higher during witnessed management. In the witnessed management group, the anxiety of healthcare providers was higher in patients who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The mean State-Trait Anxiety Inventory anxiety score of patients’ relatives was 50.2 ± 10.3. In witnessed management, the mean anxiety score was 49.5 ± 11.3; in non-witnessed management, the score was 51.0 ± 9.3. The anxiety of patients’ relatives was not higher, but rather slightly lower during witnessed management of patients.

Conclusion:

In our study, the anxiety of healthcare providers was higher in family-witnessed management. It was argued that consultant physicians were more anxious because they have more responsibility about the patients. With witnessed management, the anxiety of patients’ relatives could be reduced, but it is more ominous for healthcare professionals.

Exploring the implementation of family-witnessed resuscitation

Cardiac arrest is a traumatic event, both for patients and their family members. Traditionally, healthcare professionals have often been reluctant to offer family members the opportunity to witness cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) attempts. However, professional bodies globally have begun to recommend the use of family-witnessed resuscitation (FWR) during CPR, identifying a range of potential benefits including supporting the patient, increasing family members' confidence in healthcare professionals and, in some cases, promoting acceptance of the patient's death. This article explores the benefits of, and barriers to, the implementation of FWR during CPR. Despite the perceived benefits of FWR identified by professional bodies, healthcare professionals, and patients and their families, the evidence indicates there is ongoing reluctance among some healthcare professionals to incorporate FWR in practice. Therefore, standardised global policies aimed at the multidisciplinary implementation of FWR are required. Additionally, multidisciplinary training and education in CPR should be readily available, particularly in areas where CPR is frequently used, such as emergency departments.

Psychological effects on patient's relatives regarding their presence during resuscitation

Introduction: Presence of family and patients’ relatives throughout resuscitation procedure is one of the most challenging concerns.

Methods: In an interventional (quasi-experimental) study that was conducted during a 6 months period, the patients’ relatives were randomly divided into two groups of intervention (the relatives who were eager to be present throughout the resuscitation procedure- under the family protection protocol, all of the procedure steps were explained to the relatives by an expert nurse who was not involved in the resuscitation procedure and control group (those who were not invited routinely to be present throughout the resuscitation procedure. However, if the control group were eager to be present, they were allowed to observe the procedure (these people were not supported by the protocol). After 90 days, subjects were contacted through telephone and filled standard questionnaires (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]) and Impact of Event Scale (IES) were completed for all subjects. These questionnaires focus on anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The obtained data were analyzed.

Results: One hundred thirty three relatives were divided into two groups of control (59 subjects) and intervention (74 people). No significant difference was observed between two groups regarding demographic features. The evaluation after 90 days revealed depression, anxiety disorders and PTSD to be significantly more prevalent in control group than the intervention group (P < 0.0001 ).

Conclusion: Emotional and psychological support and intervention on the patients’ relatives are efficient and can prevent the emergence of psychological disorders.

Narratives about Resuscitation—Family Members Differ about Presence

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals disagree about admitting family members into the resuscitation room.

AIM

The aim of this study was to illuminate family members' experiences and views about being present in the resuscitation room with a relative requiring resuscitation.

RESULTS

Seventeen family members were interviewed. Their narratives were analysed using content analysis. The main theme was interpreted as family members being "afraid of disturbing the resuscitation efforts, meaning that the most important person for them was the patient". Three groups of persons were in focus: patients, family members, and healthcare professionals. The theme related to the patient was "to be caring for the good of oneself and others" describing what family members believed the patient would want and what they themselves would have wanted if in the same situation. The themes related to family members were "to be dependent on the interplay between trusting oneself and advocating the patient and to be sensitive to one's own emotions and to be reasonable". The theme related to healthcare professionals was "to submit to or ignore the guidance of the healthcare professionals".

CONCLUSION

Family members differ about their presence in the resuscitation room. Omnipresent in the narratives was being afraid of disturbing the resuscitation efforts.

Relatives' Presence During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

BACKGROUND

The question of whether or not to allow family to be present during resuscitation is relevant to everyday professional health care assistance, but it remains largely unexplored in the medical literature.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted an online survey with the aim of increasing our knowledge and understanding of this issue.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional, multicenter, descriptive, national, and international study using a web-based, voluntary survey. The survey was designed and distributed through a medical website in Spanish, targeting physicians who frequently deal with critical patients.

RESULTS

A total of 1,286 Argentine physicians and 1,848 physicians from other countries responded to this voluntary survey. Of Argentine respondents, 15.8% (203) treat only children, 68.2% (877) treat adults, and 16% (206) treat patients of any age. The survey found that 23% (296) of Argentine and 20% of other respondents favor the presence of family members during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (p = 0.03). This practice was more common among physicians treating pediatric and neonatal patients than among those who treat adults. The most commonly reported reason (21.8%) for avoiding the presence of relatives was concerns that physicians, communications, and medical practices might be misunderstood or misinterpreted.

CONCLUSIONS

Avoiding relatives' presence while performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation is the most frequent choice made by the surveyed physicians who treat critical Argentine patients. The main causes for discouraging family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation or other critical procedures include the following: risk of misinterpretation of the physician's actions and/or words; risk of a relative's decompensation; uncertainty about possible reactions; and interpretation of the relative's presence as negative.

Family Presence during Resuscitation: A Qualitative Analysis from a National Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The themes of qualitative assessments that characterize the experience of family members offered the choice of observing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) of a loved one have not been formally identified.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In the context of a multicenter randomized clinical trial offering family members the choice of observing CPR of a patient with sudden cardiac arrest, a qualitative analysis, with a sequential explanatory design, was conducted. The aim of the study was to understand family members' experience during CPR. All participants were interviewed by phone at home three months after cardiac arrest. Saturation was reached after analysis of 30 interviews of a randomly selected sample of 75 family members included in the trial. Four themes were identified: 1- choosing to be actively involved in the resuscitation; 2- communication between the relative and the emergency care team; 3- perception of the reality of the death, promoting acceptance of the loss; 4- experience and reactions of the relatives who did or did not witness the CPR, describing their feelings. Twelve sub-themes further defining these four themes were identified. Transferability of our findings should take into account the country-specific medical system.

CONCLUSIONS

Family presence can help to ameliorate the pain of the death, through the feeling of having helped to support the patient during the passage from life to death and of having participated in this important moment. Our results showed the central role of communication between the family and the emergency care team in facilitating the acceptance of the reality of death.

An Analytical Comparison of the Opinions of Physicians Working in Emergency and Trauma Surgery Departments at Tabriz and Vienna Medical Universities Regarding Family Presence during Resuscitation

The present study evaluated the opinions of physicians working in the emergency and trauma surgery departments of Vienna Medical University, in Austria, and Tabriz Medical University, in Iran, regarding the presence of patients' relatives during resuscitation. In a descriptive-analytical study, the data obtained from questionnaires that had been distributed randomly to 40 specialists and residents at each of the participating universities were analyzed. The questionnaire consisted of two sections aimed at capturing the participants' demographic data, the participants' opinions regarding their support for the family's presence during resuscitation, and the multiple potential factors affecting the participants' attitudes, including health beliefs, triggers that could facilitate the procedure, self-efficacy, intellectual norms, and perceived behavioral control. The questionnaire also included a direct question (Question 16) on whether the participants approved of family presence. Each question could be answered using a Likert-type scale. The results showed that the mean scores for Question 16 were 4.31 ± 0.64 and 3.57 ± 1.31 for participants at Vienna and Tabriz universities, respectively. Moreover, physicians at Vienna University disapproved of the presence of patients' families during resuscitation to a higher extent than did those at Tabriz University (P = 0.018). Of the studied prognostic factors affecting the perspectives of Vienna Medical University's physicians, health beliefs (P = 0.000; B = 1.146), triggers (P = 0.000; B = 1.050), and norms (P = 0.000; B = 0.714) were found to be significant. Moreover, of the studied prognostic factors affecting the perspectives of Tabriz Medical University's physicians, health beliefs (P = 0.000; B = 0.875), triggers (P = 0.000; B = 1.11), self-efficacy (P = 0.001; B = 0.5), and perceived behavioral control (P = 0.03; B = 0.713) were significant. Most physicians at Vienna and Tabriz Medical universities were not open towards family members' presence during resuscitation.

Family witnessed resuscitation: nationwide survey of 337 prehospital emergency teams in France

OBJECTIVE

To assess the practices and opinions of prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) with regard to family witnessed resuscitation (FWR) and to analyse the differences between physicians' and nurses' responses.

DESIGN

An anonymous questionnaire (30 yes/no questions on demographics and FWR) was sent to all prehospital emergency staff (physicians, nurses and support staff) working for the 377 Mobile Intensive Care Units in France.

RESULTS

Of the 2689 responses received 2664 were analysed. Mean respondent age was 38 ± 8 years, the male to female ratio was 1:2. 87% of respondents had already performed FWR and 38% had offered relatives the option to be present during resuscitation. Most respondents (90%) felt that FWR might cause psychological trauma to the family; 70% thought that FWR might impact on the duration of resuscitation and 68% on EMS team concentration. In the 28% of cases when relatives had asked to be present, 59% of respondents had acquiesced but only 27% were willing to invite relatives to be routinely present.

CONCLUSIONS

Prehospital EMS teams in France seems to support FWR but are not yet ready to offer it systematically to relatives. Following our survey, written guidelines are currently in development in our department. These guidelines could be the first step of a national strategy for developing FWR in France. We await results from other studies of family members' opinions to compare prehospital practitioners' and family members' views to further develop our practice.

A multi-center study on the attitudes of Malaysian emergency health care staff towards allowing family presence during resuscitation of adult patients

Background

The practice of allowing family members to witness on-going active resuscitation has been gaining ground in many developed countries since it was first introduced in the early 1990s. In many Asian countries, the acceptability of this practice has not been well studied.

Aim

We conducted a multi-center questionnaire study to determine the attitudes of health care professionals in Malaysia towards family presence to witness ongoing medical procedures during resuscitation.

Methods

Using a bilingual questionnaire (in Malay and English language), we asked our respondents about their attitudes towards allowing family presence (FP) as well as their actual experience of requests from families to be allowed to witness resuscitations. Multiple logistic regression was used to analyze the association between the many variables and a positive attitude towards FP.

Results

Out of 300 health care professionals who received forms, 270 responded (a 90% response rate). Generally only 15.8% of our respondents agreed to allow relatives to witness resuscitations, although more than twice the number (38.5%) agreed that relatives do have a right to be around during resuscitation. Health care providers are significantly more likely to allow FP if the procedures are perceived as likely to be successful (e.g., intravenous cannulation and blood taking as compared to chest tube insertion). Doctors were more than twice as likely as paramedics to agree to FP (p-value = 0.002). This is probably due to the Malaysian work culture in our health care systems in which paramedics usually adopt a ‘follow-the-leader’ attitude in their daily practice.

Conclusion

The concept of allowing FP is not well accepted among our Malaysian health care providers.

Family presence during resuscitation: Canadian critical care nurses' perspectives

PURPOSE

As part of a larger online survey examining the practices and preferences of Canadian critical care nurses regarding family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) of adult family members, the purpose of the study was to explicate salient issues about the practice of FPDR identified by nurses who responded to the qualitative portion of the survey.

DESIGN

Descriptive, qualitative.

METHODS

As part of an online survey, participants were given the opportunity to provide qualitative comments about their personal or professional experiences with FPDR. Data analysis was completed using content analysis and constant comparison techniques.

FINDINGS

Of the 944 nurses contacted electronically, 450 completed the survey, for a response rate of 48%. Of these, 242 opted to share qualitative comments regarding their experiences with FPDR. Four major themes emerged from the data: (a) perceived benefits for family members; (b) perceived risks for family members; (c) perceived benefits for healthcare providers; and (d) perceived risks for healthcare providers.

CONCLUSIONS

The practice of FPDR impacts both family members and members of the resuscitation team. Nurses weigh these impacts when considering whether or not to bring family members to the bedside.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The results of this study provide information for practicing clinicians, educators, and administrators regarding the decision-making processes nurses use when considerations of bringing family members to the bedside during resuscitative events are evoked.

A study of Turkish critical care nurses' perspectives regarding family-witnessed resuscitation

AIM

. This paper reports a study to determine the experiences and attitudes of Turkish critical care nurses concerning family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

BACKGROUND

The debate surrounding family-member presence in resuscitation areas has been evolving since the 1980s. The practice of performing resuscitation of adults in the presence of family members is controversial and has stimulated discussion and debate worldwide.

DESIGN

A descriptive survey.

METHOD

The survey was carried out in 2007 with 135 critical care nurses from two university hospitals in Izmir. A structured questionnaire was used, which incorporated a series of attitude statements that were rated using a three-point Likert scale. The attitudes of the nurses were explored in three areas: decision making, processes and outcomes of resuscitation.

RESULTS

Of the nurses, only 22.2% experienced a situation where family members were present during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Most of these nurses (n = 20) had one or more negative experiences. The majority disagreed that family members should always be offered the opportunity to be with the patient during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The most common concerns for not favouring family-witnessed resuscitation were reported as performance anxiety, fear of causing psychological trauma to family members and increased risk of litigation.

CONCLUSIONS

Many Turkish critical care nurses have no knowledge of family-witnessed resuscitation and do not support the practice. We suggest that Turkish critical care nurses should be informed by the international literature on the concept of family-witnessed resuscitation and the culturally appropriate policies concerning this subject should be changed in Turkish hospitals.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Most critical care nurses in Turkey are not supportive of family-witnessed resuscitation. All critical care nurses should be informed by the international literature on the concept of family-witnessed resuscitation.

The presence of a family witness impacts physician performance during simulated medical codes

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the presence and behavior of a family witness to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) impacts critical actions performed by physicians.

DESIGN

This was a randomized comparison study of physicians' performance during a simulated cardiac arrest with three different family witness states.

SETTING

This study was conducted at the Wayne State University Eugene Applebaum College of Pharmacy and Health Science's Center for Healthcare Simulation.

SUBJECTS

Second-year and third-year emergency medicine (EM) residents from the Wayne State University Department of Emergency Medicine-affiliated residency programs and Michigan State University-affiliated EM residency programs.

INTERVENTION

Thirty teams comprised of one second-year and one third-year EM resident were randomly assigned to one of the three groups: 1) no family witness; 2) a nonobstructive "quiet" family witness; and 3) a family witness displaying an overt grief reaction.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Each pair was assessed for time to critical actions (e.g., minutes to CPR and drug administration) and for resuscitation-based performance outcomes (e.g., number of shocks) during a simulated cardiac arrest. The time to critical events was similar across groups with respect to initiating CPR, attempting to intubate the patient, and pronouncing the death of the patient. However, the time to deliver the first defibrillation shock was longer for the overt reaction witness group (2.57 minutes) as compared with the quiet (1.77 minutes) and no family witness (1.67 minutes) groups. Additionally, fewer total shocks were delivered in the overt reaction witness groups (4.0 minutes) vs. the quiet (6.5 minutes) and no family witness groups (6.0 minutes).

CONCLUSION

The presence of a family witness may have a significant impact on physicians' ability to perform critical actions during simulated medical resuscitations. Further study is necessary to see if this effect crosses over into real clinical practice and if training ameliorates this effect.

Accident and emergency staff opinion on the effects of family presence during adult resuscitation: critical literature review

AIM

This paper is a report of a critical literature review to identify the positive and negative effects of family presence during adult resuscitation, as perceived by accident and emergency healthcare staff based in primary (out-of-hospital) and secondary (in-hospital) environments of care.

BACKGROUND

The controversial practice of family presence during resuscitation of adults has stimulated debate over the past two decades, giving rise to a growing body of literature and the development of clinical guidelines for practice.

METHODS

A search was carried out for the period 1987-2007 using the Science Direct, CINAHL, Medline, EMBASE, psychINFO and BNI databases and the search terms resuscitation, witnessed resuscitation, family presence, relatives' presence, attitudes and opinions and accident and emergency.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included in the critical review, primarily comprising retrospective survey research. The majority of studies were descriptive in design. A standardized approach to the appraisal process was achieved through the utilization of guidelines for critiquing self-reports. The findings revealed that accident and emergency healthcare staff perceive both positive and negative effects as a consequence of family presence during adult resuscitation and their opinions suggest that there are more risks than benefit.

CONCLUSION

Further research is essential if family presence during resuscitation of adults is to be better defined and understood. Qualitative methods of enquiry are recommended as a way of gaining a deeper insight into and understanding of this practice.

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 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.

[The new 2005 resuscitation guidelines of the European Resuscitation Council: comments and supplements]

The new CPR guidelines are based on a scientific consensus which was reached by 281 international experts. Chest compressions (100/min, 4-5 cm deep) should be performed in a ratio of 30:2 with ventilation (tidal volume 500 ml, Ti 1 s, FIO2 if possible 1.0). After a single defibrillation attempt (initially biphasic 150-200 J, monophasic 360 J, subsequently with the respective highest energy), chest compressions are initiated again immediately for 2 min. Endotracheal intubation is the gold standard; other airway devices may be employed as well depending on individual skills. Drug administration routes for adults and children: first choice IV, second choice intraosseous, third choice endobronchial [epinephrine dose 2-3x (adults) or 10x (pediatric patients) higher than IV]. Vasopressors: 1 mg epinephrine every 3-5 min IV. After the third unsuccessful defibrillation attempt amiodarone IV (300 mg); repetition (150 mg) possible. Sodium bicarbonate (1 ml/kg 8.4%) only in excessive hyperkalemia, metabolic acidosis, or intoxication with tricyclic antidepressants. Consider atropine (3 mg) and aminophylline (5 mg/kg). Thrombolysis during spontaneous circulation only in myocardial infarction or massive pulmonary embolism; during CPR only during massive pulmonary embolism. Cardiopulmonary bypass only after cardiac surgery, hypothermia or intoxication. Pediatrics: best improvement in outcome by preventing cardiocirculatory collapse. Alternate chest thumps and chest compression (infants), or abdominal compressions (>1-year-old) in foreign body airway obstruction. Initially five breaths, followed by chest compressions (100/min; approximately 1/3 of chest diameter): ventilation ratio 15:2. Treatment of potentially reversible causes (4 "Hs", "HITS": hypoxia, hypovolemia, hypo- and hyperkaliemia, hypothermia, cardiac tamponade, intoxication, thrombo-embolism, tension pneumothorax). Epinephrine 10 microg/kg IV or intraosseously, or 100 microg (endobronchially) every 3-5 min. Defibrillation (4 J/kg; monophasic oder biphasic) followed by 2 min CPR, then ECG and pulse check. Newborns: inflate the lungs with bag-valve mask ventilation. If heart rate<60/min chest compressions:ventilation ratio 3:1 (120 chest compressions/min). Postresuscitation phase: initiate mild hypothermia [32-34 degrees C for 12-24 h; slow rewarming (<0.5 degrees C/h)]. Prediction of CPR outcome is not possible at the scene; determining neurological outcome within 72 h after cardiac arrest with evoked potentials, biochemical tests and physical examination. Even during low suspicion for an acute coronary syndrome, record a prehospital 12-lead ECG. In parallel to pain therapy, aspirin (160-325 mg PO or IV) and in addition clopidogrel (300 mg PO). As antithrombin, heparin (60 IU/kg, max. 4000 IU) or enoxaparine. In ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, define reperfusion strategy depending on duration of symptoms until PCI (prevent delay>90 min until PCI). Stroke is an emergency and needs to be treated in a stroke unit. A CT scan is the most important evaluation, MRT may replace a CT scan. After hemorrhage exclusion, thrombolysis within 3 h of symptom onset (0.9 mg/kg rt-PA IV; max 90 mg within 60 min, 10% of the entire dosage as initial bolus, no aspirin, no heparin within the first 24 h). In severe hemorrhagic shock, definite control of bleeding is the most important goal. For successful CPR of trauma patients, a minimal intravascular volume status and management of hypoxia are essential. Aggressive fluid resuscitation, hyperventilation, and excessive ventilation pressure may impair outcome in severe hemorrhagic shock. Despite bad prognosis, CPR in trauma patients may be successful in select cases. Any CPR training is better than nothing; simplification of contents and processes remains important.

Comparing attitudes of the public and medical staff towards witnessed resuscitation in an Asian population

AIM

To compare the attitudes of the public attending at a local Emergency Department and the medical staff towards witnessed resuscitation.

METHODS

Over a 2-week period in April 2006, we conducted an interview survey on the relatives of patients attending at the Emergency Department of Singapore General Hospital (SGH) via a convenience sampling. We approached 156 people with a response rate of 93.5%. We compared the results with a similar study conducted on the medical staff in the Emergency Department in the same hospital.

RESULTS

Should relatives be present during resuscitation? We found that 73.1% of the public supported witnessed resuscitation compared to only 10.6% of the medical staff (P<0.001). The most frequently deemed advantage for witnessed resuscitation cited by both groups was that relatives would then have assurance that everything possible had been done for the patient. While 68.8% of the public felt that being allowed into the resuscitation area would help in their grieving processes, only 35.6% of the medical staff shared the same point of view (P<0.001). Medical staff were less likely to agree that witnessed resuscitation would strengthen the bonds between themselves and the public (P<0.001). Medical staff were however, more inclined towards the opinion that relatives would have a traumatic experience in witnessing resuscitation of their loved ones (P<0.001) and that the presence of relatives would cause stress to the medical staff performing resuscitation (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Locally, we find a discrepancy between healthcare workers and the public towards the concept of witnessed resuscitation. More research is needed on the attitudes of the Asian public and medical staff.

Death, dying, and last wishes

Issues regarding patient care near the end of life can be challenging and rewarding for emergency physicians. Knowledge of the patient's wishes is essential, and may be accomplished by advance directives or communication with patients and surrogates. Resuscitative efforts are appropriate for many patients, but inappropriate for others. The goals of medicine remain the following: providing optimal health care, provision of the best possible symptom control, communication, empathy, and caring. As death approaches, provision of the best possible medical care, in accordance with the patient's wishes, can be rewarding for patients, families, and health care providers.

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.

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.

Report of the National Consensus Conference on Family Presence During Pediatric Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Procedures

Representatives from 18 national organizations were convened for a conference to develop recommendations regarding family presence (FP) during pediatric procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Before the conference, invitees were given a questionnaire and provided with current literature regarding FP. A modified Delphi process was used to develop consensus, including use of multiple questionnaires and breakouts for discussion of specific issues. Participants were encouraged to develop consensus recommendations based on the literature and discussions. Changes in attitude were tracked with repeat questionnaires. Results of the conference were circulated to participants for review and revision. Consensus recommendations include (1) consider FP as an option for families during pediatric procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation, (2) offer FP as an option after assessing factors that could adversely affect the interaction, (3) if family is not offered the option for FP, document the reasons why, (4) always consider the safety of the health care team, (5) develop in-hospital transport and transfer policies and procedures for FP, such as family member definition, preparation of the family, handling disagreements, and providing support for the staff, (6) obtain legal review of policies, (7) include education in FP in all core curricula and orientation for health care providers, (8) promote research into best methods for education; effects of FP on patients, family, and staff; best practices for FP; and legal issues regarding FP, among others. These recommendations were approved in concept by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Ambulatory Pediatrics Association.

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.

Report of the National Consensus Conference on Family Presence During Pediatric Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Procedures

Representatives from 18 national organizations were convened for a conference to develop recommendations regarding family presence (FP) during pediatric procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Before the conference, invitees were given a questionnaire and provided with current literature regarding FP. A modified Delphi process was used to develop consensus, including use of multiple questionnaires and breakouts for discussion of specific issues. Participants were encouraged to develop consensus recommendations based on the literature and discussions. Changes in attitude were tracked with repeat questionnaires. Results of the conference were circulated to participants for review and revision. Consensus recommendations include (1) consider FP as an option for families during pediatric procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation, (2) offer FP as an option after assessing factors that could adversely affect the interaction, (3) if family is not offered the option for FP, document the reasons why, (4) always consider the safety of the health care team, (5) develop in-hospital transport and transfer policies and procedures for FP, such as family member definition, preparation of the family, handling disagreements, and providing support for the staff, (6) obtain legal review of policies, (7) include education in FP in all core curricula and orientation for health care providers, (8) promote research into best methods for education; effects of FP on patients, family, and staff; best practices for FP; and legal issues regarding FP, among others. These recommendations were approved in concept by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Ambulatory Pediatrics Association.

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.

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.

Asian medical staff attitudes towards witnessed resuscitation

AIM

To assess and compare local Emergency Department medical and nursing staff attitudes towards witnessed resuscitation.

METHODS

Over a period from October 2002 to March 2003, we conducted a self-administered survey of doctors and nurses working in the Emergency Department of the Singapore General Hospital (SGH). We issued 160 forms and received 132 responses, giving a response rate of 82.5%.

RESULTS

Should relatives be present during resuscitation? Eighty percent of doctors and 78% of nurses said no. However 32.1% of doctors and 24.1% of nurses had received requests from relatives of patients to be present during resuscitation in the last 6 months. The most frequent reasons for not wanting relatives to be present were: concern that watching the resuscitation process will be a traumatic experience for relatives, relatives might ask too many questions and interfere with resuscitation, relatives might cause stress for staff performing resuscitation, and medico-legal issues might arise. A total of 78.4% of doctors felt that the decision to allow family presence during resuscitation should be made by the senior doctor and not the nursing officer (P=0.001). However, nurses were more likely to feel that it should be a team decision (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Locally, we found that medical staff are generally not in favour of witnessed resuscitation. More research is needed to assess attitudes of the general public, and whether this diverges greatly from medical staff attitudes.

Study examining attitudes of staff, patients and relatives to witnessed resuscitation in adult intensive care units

BACKGROUND

Witnessed resuscitation is widely accepted in paediatric practice and is becoming more common in adult emergency departments, but information on this topic is sparse.

METHODS

We gave a questionnaire to 50 intensive care medical and nursing staff and 55 patients and next of kin before elective postoperative admission to the intensive care unit to examine staff opinion about witnessed resuscitation, patient and relatives' demand for witnessed resuscitation, and their perception of the benefits.

RESULTS

We found that 56% of doctors and 66% of nurses favoured giving relatives the option to stay. If relatives requested to be present, 70% of doctors and 82% of nurses would allow this if the relatives were escorted. The role of the escort was felt to explain, prevent interference, and to provide emotional support. We found that 29% of patients and 47% of relatives wanted to be together during resuscitation, the commonest reasons being to provide support and to see that everything was done. We found that 95% of patients and 91% of relatives felt their views should be formally sought before ICU admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive care staff support witnessed resuscitation. Many intensive care personnel have experienced witnessed resuscitation and the majority felt that relatives gained benefit. Almost all agree that the views of both patient and relatives should be sought formally before admission to intensive care.

Should relatives be denied access to the resuscitation room?

Within a health care system that promotes choice and autonomy, it no longer seems appropriate to exclude relatives from the resuscitation room. There is a growing body of research that suggests there are indeed many long-term benefits to be gained from witnessing the resuscitation of a loved one. There seems no doubt that relatives would like the opportunity to spend the last few valuable minutes with their loved one to say goodbye. However, it is the views of many staff working in the critical care setting that appear to be preventing witnessed resuscitation from becoming normal practice. This paper considers the staffs', the relatives' and the patients' perspectives on witnessed resuscitation and concludes that the majority of relatives should not be denied access to the resuscitation room.

Witnessed resuscitation in critical care: the case against

The aim of this discussion is to raise awareness of the negative aspects of witnessed resuscitation. The historical precedents associated with the introduction of the concept are outlined. The disadvantages of introducing witnessed resuscitation are delineated. These include issues of human dignity, personal privacy and the provision of adequately trained staff to help relatives cope with the emotional trauma the experience of being a witness may invoke. The paper concludes by calling for more widespread debate and research into the efficacy of introducing such policies into practice.

Advanced cardiac life support for the new millennium

The American Heart Association has been the recognized source for Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) education for the past three decades. Since the first ACLS course, numerous revisions have been made to the management algorithms based on evolving scientific evidence. The last revisions made in August 2000 were the first international guidelines published. These guidelines reflect the intense review and analysis of scientific work and emphasize the importance of evidence-based therapies. This article outlines the major changes to ACLS guidelines for dysrhythmias, acute coronary syndromes, and acute stroke management.

Part 9: pediatric basic life support. European Resuscitation Council

The epidemiology and outcome of pediatric cardiopulmonary arrest and the priorities, techniques, and sequence of pediatric resuscitation assessments and intervention differ from those of adults. Current guidelines have been updated after extensive multinational evidence-based review and discussion over several years. Areas of controversy in current guidelines and recommendations made by consensus are detailed. A large degree of uniformity exists in the current guidelines advocated by the AHA, Council on Latin American Resuscitation, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, European Resuscitation Council, Australian Resuscitation Council, and Resuscitation Council of Southern Africa. Differences are currently based on local and regional preferences, training networks, and customs rather than scientific controversy. Unresolved issues with potential for future universal application are highlighted.