Factors influencing family member perspectives on safety in the intensive care unit: a systematic review

The facilitators and barriers to implementing virtual visits in intensive care units: A mixed-methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

Visitation has a positive effect on patients and families, yet, it can disrupt intensive care unit (ICU) care and increase the risk of patient infections, which previously favoured face-to-face visits. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has raised the importance of virtual visits and led to their widespread adoption globally, there are still many implementation barriers that need to be improved. Therefore, this review aimed to explore the use of ICU virtual visit technology during the COVID-19 pandemic and the barriers and facilitators of virtual visits to improve virtual visits in ICUs.

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, six databases (CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], PubMed, Cochrane, VIP and Wang Fang databases) were searched for empirical studies published between 1 January 2020 and 22 October 2023. Studies that investigated and reported barriers to and facilitators of implementing virtual visits in ICUs during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. Evidence from the included studies was identified and thematically analysed using Thomas and Harden's three-step approach. Study quality was appraised with the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool.

RESULTS

A total of 6770 references were screened, of which 35 studies met the inclusion criteria after a full-text review. Eight main barriers to virtual visits use were identified: technical difficulties; insufficient resources; lack of physical presence and nonverbal information; low technical literacy; differences in families' perceptions of visual cues; privacy and ethics issues; inequitable access and use of virtual visit technology; and lack of advance preparation. Four facilitating factors of virtual visit use were identified: providing multidimensional professional support; strengthening coordination services; understanding the preferences of patients and their families; and enhancing privacy and security protection. In the quality appraisal of 35 studies, 12 studies were rated as low, five as medium and 18 as high methodological quality.

CONCLUSION

This review identified key facilitating factors and barriers to ICU virtual visits, which can foster the development of infrastructure, virtual visiting workflows, guidelines, policies and visiting systems to improve ICU virtual visiting services. Further studies are necessary to identify potential solutions to the identified barriers.

How do hospital inpatients conceptualise patient safety? A qualitative interview study using constructivist grounded theory

BACKGROUND

Efforts to involve patients in patient safety continue to revolve around professionally derived notions of minimising clinical risk, yet evidence suggests that patients hold perspectives on patient safety that are distinct from clinicians and academics. This study aims to understand how hospital inpatients across three different specialties conceptualise patient safety and develop a conceptual model that reflects their perspectives.

METHODS

A qualitative semi-structured interview study was conducted with 24 inpatients across three clinical specialties (medicine for the elderly, elective surgery and maternity) at a large central London teaching hospital. An abbreviated form of constructivist grounded theory was employed to analyse interview transcripts. Constant comparative analysis and memo-writing using the clustering technique were used to develop a model of how patients conceptualise patient safety.

RESULTS

While some patients described patient safety using terms consistent with clinical/academic definitions, patients predominantly conceptualised patient safety in the context of what made them 'feel safe'. Patients' feelings of safety arose from a range of care experiences involving specific actors: hospital staff, the patient, their friends/family/carers, and the healthcare organisation. Four types of experiences contributed to how patients conceptualise safety: actions observed by patients; actions received by patients; actions performed by patients themselves; and shared actions involving patients and other actors in their care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the need for a patient safety paradigm that is meaningful to all stakeholders, incorporating what matters to patients to feel safe in hospital. Additional work should explore and test how the proposed conceptual model can be practically applied and implemented to incorporate the patient conceptualisation of patient safety into everyday clinical practice.

Virtual visiting in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative descriptive study with ICU clinicians and non-ICU family team liaison members

OBJECTIVE

To understand the experiences and perceived benefits of virtual visiting from the perspectives of intensive care unit (ICU)-experienced clinicians and non-ICU-experienced family liaison team members.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive study.

SETTING

Adult intensive care setting across 14 hospitals within the UK National Health Service.

PARTICIPANTS

ICU-experienced clinicians and non-ICU-experienced family liaison team members deployed during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Semistructured telephone/video interviews were conducted with ICU clinicians. Analytical themes were developed inductively following a standard thematic approach, using 'family-centred care' and 'sensemaking' as sensitising concepts.

RESULTS

We completed 36 interviews, with 17 ICU-experienced clinicians and 19 non-ICU-experienced family liaison team members. In the context of inperson visiting restrictions, virtual visiting offered an alternative conduit to (1) restoring the family unit, (2) facilitating family involvement, and (3) enabling sensemaking for the family. Virtual visits with multiple family members concurrently and with those living in distant geographical locations restored a sense of family unit. Family involvement in rehabilitation, communication and orientation activities, as well as presence at the end of life, highlighted how virtual visiting could contribute to family-centred care. Virtual visits were emotionally challenging for many family members, but also cathartic in helping make sense of their own emotions and experience by visualising their relatives in the ICU. Being able to see and interact with loved ones and their immediate care providers afforded important cues to enable family sensemaking of the ICU experience.

CONCLUSIONS

In this UK qualitative study of clinicians using virtual ICU visiting, in the absence of inperson visiting, virtual visiting was perceived positively as an alternative that promoted family-centred care through virtual presence. We anticipate the perceived benefits of virtual visiting may extend to non-pandemic conditions through improved equity and timeliness of family access to the ICU by offering an alternative option alongside inperson visiting.