Symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in next of kin during suspension of ICU visits during the COVID-19 pandemic: a prospective observational study

Impact of restricted family presence during the COVID-19 pandemic on critically ill patients, families, and critical care clinicians: a qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

We aimed to synthesize the qualitative evidence on the impacts of COVID-19-related restricted family presence policies from the perspective of patients, families, and healthcare professionals from neonatal (NICU), pediatric (PICU), or adult ICUs.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Databases of Reviews and Clinical Trials, CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Two researchers independently reviewed titles/abstracts and full-text articles for inclusion. Thematic analysis was completed following appraising article quality and assessing confidence in the individual review findings using standardized tools.

RESULTS

We synthesized 54 findings from 184 studies, revealing the impacts of these policies in children and adults on: (1) Family integrated care and patient and family-centered care (e.g., disruption to breastfeeding/kangaroo care, dehumanizing of patients); (2) Patients, families, and healthcare professionals (e.g., negative mental health consequences, moral distress); (3) Support systems (e.g., loss of support from friends/families); and (4) Relationships (e.g., loss of essential bonding with infant, struggle to develop trust). Strategies to mitigate these impacts are reported.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the multifaceted impacts of restricted visitation policies across distinct care settings and strategies to mitigate the harmful effects of these policies and guide the creation of compassionate family presence policies in future health crises.

REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=290263 .

Postintensive care syndrome in patients and family members. Analysis of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cohorts, with face-to-face follow-up at three months and one year

OBJECTIVE

Compare prevalence and profile of post-intensive care patient (P-PICS) and family/caregiver (F-PICS) syndrome in two cohorts (COVID and non-COVID) and analyse risk factors for P-PICS.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational cohort (March 2018-2023), follow-up at three months and one year.

SETTING

14-bed polyvalent Intensive Care Unit (ICU), Level II Hospital.

PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS

265 patients and 209 relatives. Inclusion criteria patients: age > 18 years, mechanical ventilation > 48 h, ICU stay > 5 days, delirium, septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac arrest. Inclusion criteria family: those who attended.

INTERVENTIONS

Follow-up 3 months and 1 year after hospital discharge.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Patients: sociodemographic, clinical, evolutive, physical, psychological and cognitive alterations, dependency degree and quality of life. Main caregivers: mental state and physical overload.

RESULTS

64.9% PICS-P, no differences between groups. COVID patients more physical alterations than non-COVID (P = .028). These more functional deterioration (P = .005), poorer quality of life (P = .003), higher nutritional alterations (P = .004) and cognitive deterioration (P < .001). 19.1% PICS-F, more frequent in relatives of non-COVID patients (17.6% vs. 5.5%; P = .013). Independent predictors of PICS-P: first years of the study (OR: 0.484), higher comorbidity (OR: 1.158), delirium (OR: 2.935), several reasons for being included (OR: 3.171) and midazolam (OR: 4.265).

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence PICS-P and PICS-F between both cohorts was similar. Main factors associated with the development of SPCI-P were: higher comorbidity, delirium, midazolan, inclusion for more than one reason and during the first years.

Outcomes and Management After COVID-19 Critical Illness

TOPIC IMPORTANCE

COVID-19 has caused > 7 million deaths worldwide since its onset in 2019. Although the severity of illness has varied throughout the pandemic, critical illness related to COVID-19 persists. Survivors of COVID-19 critical illness can be left with sequelae of both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and long-term effects of critical illness included within post-intensive care syndrome. Given the complexity and heterogeneity of COVID-19 critical illness, the biopsychosocial-ecological model can aid in evaluation and treatment of survivors, integrating interactions among physical, cognitive, and psychological domains, as well as social systems and environments.

REVIEW FINDINGS

Prolonged illness after COVID-19 critical illness generally can be classified into effects on physical, cognitive, and psychosocial function, with much interaction among the various effects, and includes a wide range of symptoms such as ICU-acquired weakness, prolonged respiratory symptoms, cognitive changes, post-traumatic stress disorder post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression. Risk factors for COVID-19 critical illness developing are complex and include preexisting factors, disease course, and specifics of hospitalization in addition to psychological comorbidities and socioenvironmental factors. Recovery trajectories are not well defined, and management requires a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and individualized approach to care.

SUMMARY

The onset of vaccinations, new therapeutics, and new strains of SARS-CoV-2 virus have decreased COVID-19 mortality; however, the number of survivors of COVID-19 critical illness remains high. A biopsychosocial-ecological approach is recommended to guide care of COVID-19 critical illness survivors.

Psychological impact of medical evacuation for ICU saturation in Covid-19-related ARDS patients

PURPOSE

Psychological impact of Medical Evacuation (MEDEVAC) in Covid-19 patients is undetermined. The objectives were to evaluate: Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in MEDEVAC patients hospitalized in ICU for Covid-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) compared to control group; anxiety, depression rates and outcomes in patients and PTSD in relatives.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective multicentric 1/1 paired cohort performed in 10 ICUs in the West of France. Evaluation was performed 18 months after discharge. Patients and closest relatives performed IES-R (Impact and Event Scale-Revised) and/or HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) scales.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients were included in each group. Patients were 64 ± 11 years old, with 83% male. We report 12 vs 20% of PTSD in control vs MEDEVAC groups (p = 0.7). Anxiety disorder affected 43.5 vs 28.0% (p = 0.26) and depression 12.5 vs 14.3% (p > 0.99) in control vs MEDEVAC groups. PTSD affects 33.3 vs 42.1% of closest relatives (p = 0.55). Ways of communication were adapted: video calls were more frequent in MEDEVAC patients (8.7 vs 60.9%, p < 0.01) whereas physical visits concerned more control group (45.8 vs 13.0%, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

PTSD rate were similar between groups. Adaptive ways of communication, restricted visits and global uncertainties could explain the absence of differences.

The Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Visitor Restrictions on the Attitudes of Emergency Department Staff

INTRODUCTION

During the first 2 years of the pandemic, visitors for patients with COVID-19 were prohibited from emergency departments in the United States with few exceptions, leaving patients without their caregivers and advocates. Little is known about emergency nurses and nursing assistive personnel beliefs regarding this issue. Therefore, this study's purpose was to describe and assess relationships among emergency nursing and assistive personnel attitudes and perceptions regarding emergency department "no-visitor policies" for patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

This institutional review board-approved observational study was conducted in a health care system in the Southwestern United States. Nursing personnel (n = 180; 21.74% response rate) working in 11 emergency departments completed the survey during the fall of 2021. Bivariate correlations and multivariable linear regression modeling were performed to explore relationships among survey questions.

RESULTS

Most participants (61%) strongly/very strongly believed that restriction of visitors for patients with COVID-19 was necessary for the protection of staff and patients. In addition, 65% reported strongly/very strongly agreeing that it was unethical and 75% felt upset when these patients died alone. Most (81%) strongly/very strongly agreed that exemptions to the policy should be made in some cases, including imminent death. Respondents' recognition of patients' displeasure with visitor policy, recognition that a lack of visitors affected efficiency, and feeling upset when these patients died alone negatively predicted agreement that restriction was necessary.

CONCLUSION

Although most participants favored visitation restrictions for patients with coronavirus disease 2019, their beliefs were complex. Navigating stringent visitation policies and vulnerable patients' needs can result in moral distress for ED personnel.

Impact of COVID-19 infection experience on mental health status of intensive care unit patients' family members: a real-world study

PURPOSE

Family members of patients hospitalized in intensive care unit (ICU) are susceptible to adverse psychological outcomes. However, there is a paucity of studies specifically examining the mental health symptoms in ICU patients' family members with a prior history of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.

AIM

This study aimed to investigate mental health status and its influencing factors of ICU patients' family members with previous COVID-19 infection experience in China.

DESIGN

Nationwide, cross-sectional cohort of consecutive participants of family members of ICU patients from 10 provinces randomly selected in mainland China conducted between October 2022 and May 2023.

METHODS

The basic information scale, Self-rating depression scale, Self-rating Anxiety Scale, Impact of Event Scale-Revised, Pittsburgh sleep quality index, Perceived Stress Scale, Connor-Davidson resilience scale, Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire were employed to explore mental health status among participants.

RESULTS

A total of 463 participants, comprising 156 individuals in Covid-19 family member cohort (infection group) and 307 individuals in control family member cohort (control group), met inclusion criteria. The infection group exhibited significantly higher incidence of composite mental health symptoms compared to control group (P = 0.017). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that being female, engaging in physical/mental labor, residing in rural areas, and having children were identified as risk factors for the development of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, while medical history of surgery was protective factor. A predictive model demonstrated a favorable discriminative ability and excellent calibration.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 infection experience regarded as new traumatic stressors worsen mental health status of ICU patients' family members.

"We Aren't Meant to Go Through the Hardest Parts of Our Lives Alone": Family Experience With Restricted PICU Presence During the COVID-19 Pandemic

CONTEXT

PICUs across Canada restricted family presence (RFP) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic from allowing two or more family members to often only one family member at the bedside. The objective of this study was to describe the experiences and impact of RFP on families of critically ill children to inform future policy and practice.

HYPOTHESIS

RFP policies negatively impacted families of PICU patients and caused moral distress.

METHODS AND MODELS

National, cross-sectional, online, self-administered survey. Family members of children admitted to a Canadian PICU between March 2020 and February 2021 were invited to complete the survey. RFP-attributable distress was measured with a modified distress thermometer (0-10). Closed-ended questions were reported with descriptive statistics and multivariable linear regression assessed factors associated with RFP-attributable distress. Open-ended questions were analyzed using inductive content analysis.

RESULTS

Of 250 respondents who experienced RFP, 124 (49.6%) were restricted to one family member at the bedside. The median amount of distress that families attributed to RFP policies was 6 (range: 0-10). Families described isolation, removal of supports, and perception of trauma related to RFP. Most families (183, 73.2%) felt that policies were enforced in a way that made them feel valued by PICU clinicians, which was associated with less RFP-attributable distress. Differential impact was seen where families with lower household income indicated higher RFP-attributable distress score (2.35; 95% CI, 0.53-4.17; p = 0.03). Most respondents suggested that future policies should allow at least two family members at the bedside.

INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Families of children admitted to PICUs during the COVID-19 pandemic described increased distress, trauma, and removal of supports due to RFP policies. Vulnerable families showed an increased odds of higher distress. Healthcare professionals played an important role in mitigating distress. Allowance of at least two family members at the bedside should be considered for future policy.

The usability of a digital diary from the perspectives of intensive care patients' relatives: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Diaries have been used regularly in international settings as an evidence-based and easily applicable intervention following a person-centred approach in the intensive care unit (ICU). In addition, a diary web application known as 'Post-ICU' has been implemented.

AIM

To explore the usability of an innovative digital diary from the perspectives of intensive care patients' relatives.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional online survey study was applied among a convenience sample of relatives in the ICUs of two hospitals in the Netherlands. The investigator-developed questionnaire included, among other things, items with the appreciation of the layout, user friendliness and functionality of the diary. Relevance and applicability were rated between 1 and 10. Data were analysed with SPSS© software, version 27, and reported as the means (±standard deviation [SD]) and percentages.

RESULTS

Sixty-three relatives with an average age of 51 years (SD ± 14.3) participated in the study; there was a slight predominance of women (57%). All but one participant found using the digital diary easy and were able to upload photos to the diary. The participants had invited other relatives (75%) and nurses (61%) to write in the diary, which they viewed as easily feasible (89%). The relevance and applicability of the diary were rated with mean scores of 8.1 (SD ± 1.9) and 8.3 (SD ± 1.6), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The participants found the Post-ICU diary web application highly valuable and easily feasible. Perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and technophobia were not found to influence the usability of the digital diary.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The implementation of this new digital tool supports a person-centred ICU policy because of its focus on the personal diary entries of the patient and the collaborative writing process featuring relatives and professionals.

Support for relatives in the intensive care unit: lessons from a cross-sectional multicentre cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Support for relatives is highly important in the intensive care unit (ICU). During the first COVID-19 wave  support for relatives had to be changed considerably. The alternative support could have decreased the quality and sense of support. We aimed to evaluate how support for relatives in Dutch ICUs was organised during the first COVID-19 wave and how this was experienced by these relatives in comparison to relatives from pre-COVID-19 and the second wave. Additionally, we aimed to investigate which elements of support are associated with positive experiences.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional multicentre cohort study in six Dutch ICUs in the Netherlands. Written questionnaires were distributed among relatives of ICU patients from pre-COVID-19, the first wave and the second wave. The questionnaire included questions on demographics, the organisation of support, and the experiences and satisfaction of relatives with the support.

RESULTS

A total of 329 relatives completed the questionnaire (52% partner, 72% woman and 63% ICU stay of 11 days or longer). Support for relatives of ICU patients during the first COVID-19 wave differed significantly from pre-COVID-19 and the second wave. Differences were found in all categories of elements of support: who, when, how and what. Overall, relatives from the three time periods were very positive about the support. The only difference in satisfaction between the three time periods, was the higher proportion of relatives indicating that healthcare professionals had enough time for them during the first wave. Elements of support which were associated with many positive experiences and satisfaction were: fixed timeslot, receiving information (e.g. leaflets) on ≥ 2 topics, discussing > 5 topics with healthcare professionals, and being offered emotional support.

CONCLUSIONS

Although, support for relatives in the ICU changed considerably during the COVID-19 pandemic, relatives were still positive about this support. The altered support gave insight into avenues for improvement for future comparable situations as well as for normal daily ICU practice: e.g. daily contact at a fixed timeslot, offering video calling between patients and relatives, and offering emotional support. ICUs should consider which elements need improvement in their practice.

Incidence, Risk Factors, and Consequences of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms in Survivors of COVID-19-Related ARDS

Purpose: To assess the prevalence of symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in survivors of COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome that needed ICU care; to investigate risk factors and their impact on the Health-Related Quality of life (HR-QoL). Materials and Methods: This multicenter, prospective, observational study included all patients who were discharged from the ICU. Patients were administered the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level Version (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire, the Short-Form Health Survey 36Version 2 (SF-36v2), a socioeconomic question set and the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) to assess PTSD. Results: The multivariate logistic regression model found that an International Standard Classification of Education Score (ISCED) higher than 2 (OR 3.42 (95% CI 1.28-9.85)), monthly income less than EUR 1500 (OR 0.36 (95% CI 0.13-0.97)), and more than two comorbidities (OR 4.62 (95% CI 1.33-16.88)) are risk factors for developing PTSD symptoms. Patients with PTSD symptoms are more likely to present a worsening in their quality of life as assessed by EQ-5D-5L and SF-36 scales. Conclusion: The main factors associated with the development of PTSD-related symptoms were a higher education level, a lower monthly income, and more than two comorbidities. Patients who developed symptoms of PTSD reported a significantly lower Health-Related Quality of life as compared to patients without PTSD. Future research areas should be oriented toward recognizing potential psychosocial and psychopathological variables capable of influencing the quality of life of patients discharged from the intensive care unit to better recognize the prognosis and longtime effects of diseases.

Family support in intensive care units during COVID-19 visit ban: A multinational Delphi Study during first COVID-19 wave

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed opinions and experiences of healthcare professionals, former patients and family members during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and focuses on challenges in family-centred care for intensive care unit patients and affected families.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/DESIGN

A two-round modified Delphi process assessed the opinions and experiences of experts such as healthcare professionals, former patients and their families (n = 151).

SETTING

This study was conducted across four countries in Europe.

RESULTS

In total, 121 participants (response rate 80.13%) answered the first Delphi round; the second was answered by 131 participants (response rate 86.75%). Participants perceived family support in the intensive care unit as highly important during the COVID-19 pandemic. Enabling contact amongst patients, families and clinicians is regarded as essential to build hope and confidence in the treatment and the recovery process. The extraordinary situation led to the implementation of new communication structures such as video calls and websites.

CONCLUSION

A consensus was reached between healthcare professionals that virtual contact is essential for patients with COVID-19 and their families during visit restrictions. This should be done to establish confidence in the treatment.

Quality of Life in COVID-Related ARDS Patients One Year after Intensive Care Discharge (Odissea Study): A Multicenter Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Investigating the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after intensive care unit (ICU) discharge is necessary to identify possible modifiable risk factors. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the HRQoL in COVID-19 critically ill patients one year after ICU discharge.

METHODS

In this multicenter prospective observational study, COVID-19 patients admitted to nine ICUs from 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 in Italy were enrolled. One year after ICU discharge, patients were required to fill in short-form health survey 36 (SF-36) and impact of event-revised (IES-R) questionnaire. A multivariate linear or logistic regression analysis to search for factors associated with a lower HRQoL and post-traumatic stress disorded (PTSD) were carried out, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 1003 patients screened, 343 (median age 63 years [57-70]) were enrolled. Mechanical ventilation lasted for a median of 10 days [2-20]. Physical functioning (PF 85 [60-95]), physical role (PR 75 [0-100]), emotional role (RE 100 [33-100]), bodily pain (BP 77.5 [45-100]), social functioning (SF 75 [50-100]), general health (GH 55 [35-72]), vitality (VT 55 [40-70]), mental health (MH 68 [52-84]) and health change (HC 50 [25-75]) describe the SF-36 items. A median physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores were 45.9 (36.5-53.5) and 51.7 (48.8-54.3), respectively, considering 50 as the normal value of the healthy general population. In all, 109 patients (31.8%) tested positive for post-traumatic stress disorder, also reporting a significantly worse HRQoL in all SF-36 domains. The female gender, history of cardiovascular disease, liver disease and length of hospital stay negatively affected the HRQoL. Weight at follow-up was a risk factor for PTSD (OR 1.02, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The HRQoL in COVID-19 ARDS (C-ARDS) patients was reduced regarding the PCS, while the median MCS value was slightly above normal. Some risk factors for a lower HRQoL have been identified, the presence of PTSD is one of them. Further research is warranted to better identify the possible factors affecting the HRQoL in C-ARDS.

Family caregivers' responses to a visitation restriction policy at a Korean surgical intensive care unit before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, restricting family visits in the ICU has increased concerns regarding negative psychosocial consequences to patients and families.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the quality of life, depressive symptoms, and emotions in family caregivers of ICU patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to explore families' perceptions and suggestions for the visitation.

METHODS

A cross-sectional descriptive survey was conducted in 99 family caregivers of adult surgical ICU patients from an urban academic medical center in South Korea (February to July 2021). The WHO's Quality of Life-BREF, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression, and Visual Analogue Scale were used to assess quality of life, depressive symptoms, and emotions, respectively. The Family Perception Checklist was used to assess families' perceptions and suggestions about the visitation restriction. Results were compared with the data from our previous survey (n = 187) in 2017.

RESULTS

Family caregivers were mostly women (n = 59), adult children (n = 43) or spouse (n = 38) of patients with mean age of 47.34 years. Family caregivers surveyed during the pandemic reported worsening sadness (54.66 ± 28.93, 45.58 ± 29.44, P = 0.005) and anxiety (53.86 ± 30.07, 43.22 ± 29.02, P = 0.001) than those who were surveyed in. While majority of families were satisfied with the visitation restrictions (86.9%), only 50.5% were satisfied with the amount of information provided on the patient's condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Visitation restriction is necessary during the COVID-19 pandemic despite sadness and anxiety reported in caregivers. Hence, alternative visitation strategies are needed to mitigate psychological distress and provide sufficient information to ICU family caregivers.

Video calls did not reduce PTSD symptoms in relatives during restricted ICU visits in the COVID-19 pandemic

To help reduce the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the COVID-19 pandemic, ICU visits were banned or restricted. Therefore, family-centered care as usually practiced was not feasible Video calls were recommended to meet relatives’ needs. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of video calls on symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in relatives of ICU patients. This single-center study was performed during the first wave (15.03.2020‒30.04.2020; visits banned) and the second wave (01.10.20‒08.02.21: visits restricted) of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) was used to assess PTSD symptoms and an adapted version of the Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit 24-Item-Revised questionnaire (aFS-ICU 24R) to assess family satisfaction 3 months after ICU stay. The primary outcome was the difference in IES-R score at 3 months between the video call group (VCG) and the standard care group (SCG, no video calls). In addition, inductive content analysis of relatives’ comments regarding their satisfaction with decision-making and ICU care was performed. Fifty-two relatives (VCG: n = 26, SCG: n = 26) were included in this study. No significant difference in IES-R scores was observed between the VCG and the SCG (49.52 ± 13.41 vs. 47.46 ± 10.43, p = 0.54). During the ICU stay (mean 12 days, range 5.25‒18.75 days), the members of the VCG made a median of 3 (IQR 1‒10.75) video calls. No difference between the groups was found for conventional telephone calls during the same period (VCG: 9 calls, IQR 3.75‒18.1; SCG: 5 calls, IQR 3‒9; p = 0.12). The aFS-ICU 24R scores were high for both groups: 38 (IQR 37‒40) in the VCG and 40 (IQR 37‒40: p = 0.24) in the SCG. Video calls appeared largely ineffective in reducing PTSD symptoms or improving satisfaction among relatives affected by banning/restriction of ICU visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further investigations are needed to acquire more data on the factors involved in PTSD symptoms experienced by relatives of ICU patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Evidence-informed consensus statements to guide COVID-19 patient visitation policies: results from a national stakeholder meeting

PURPOSE

Hospital policies forbidding or limiting families from visiting relatives on the intensive care unit (ICU) has affected patients, families, healthcare professionals, and patient- and family-centered care (PFCC). We sought to refine evidence-informed consensus statements to guide the creation of ICU visitation policies during the current COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics and to identify barriers and facilitators to their implementation and sustained uptake in Canadian ICUs.

METHODS

We created consensus statements from 36 evidence-informed experiences (i.e., impacts on patients, families, healthcare professionals, and PFCC) and 63 evidence-informed strategies (i.e., ways to improve restricted visitation) identified during a modified Delphi process (described elsewhere). Over two half-day virtual meetings on 7 and 8 April 2021, 45 stakeholders (patients, families, researchers, clinicians, decision-makers) discussed and refined these consensus statements. Through qualitative descriptive content analysis, we evaluated the following points for 99 consensus statements: 1) their importance for improving restricted visitation policies; 2) suggested modifications to make them more applicable; and 3) facilitators and barriers to implementing these statements when creating ICU visitation policies.

RESULTS

Through discussion, participants identified three areas for improvement: 1) clarity, 2) accessibility, and 3) feasibility. Stakeholders identified several implementation facilitators (clear, flexible, succinct, and prioritized statements available in multiple modes), barriers (perceived lack of flexibility, lack of partnership between government and hospital, change fatigue), and ways to measure and monitor their use (e.g., family satisfaction, qualitative interviews).

CONCLUSIONS

Existing guidance on policies that disallowed or restricted visitation in intensive care units were confusing, hard to operationalize, and often lacked supporting evidence. Prioritized, succinct, and clear consensus statements allowing for local adaptability are necessary to guide the creation of ICU visitation policies and to optimize PFCC.

A multicomponent family support intervention in intensive care units: study protocol for a multicenter cluster-randomized trial (FICUS Trial)

BACKGROUND

Family members of critically ill patients face considerable uncertainty and distress during their close others' intensive care unit (ICU) stay. About 20-60% of family members experience adverse mental health outcomes post-ICU, such as symptoms of anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress. Guidelines recommend structured family inclusion, communication, and support, but the existing evidence base around protocolized family support interventions is modest and requires substantiation.

METHODS

To test the clinical effectiveness and explore the implementation of a multicomponent, nurse-led family support intervention in ICUs, we will undertake a parallel, cluster-randomized, controlled, multicenter superiority hybrid-type 1 trial. It will include eight clusters (ICUs) per study arm, with a projected total sample size of 896 family members of adult, critically ill patients treated in the German-speaking part of Switzerland. The trial targets family members of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay of 48 h or longer. Families in the intervention arm will receive a family support intervention in addition to usual care. The intervention consists of specialist nurse support that is mapped to the patient pathway with follow-up care and includes psycho-educational and relationship-focused family interventions, and structured, interprofessional communication, and shared decision-making with families. Families in the control arm will receive usual care. The primary study endpoint is quality of family care, operationalized as family members' satisfaction with ICU care at discharge. Secondary endpoints include quality of communication and nurse support, family management of critical illness (functioning, resilience), and family members' mental health (well-being, psychological distress) measured at admission, discharge, and after 3, 6, and 12 months. Data of all participants, regardless of protocol adherence, will be analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, with the individual participant as the unit of inference.

DISCUSSION

This trial will examine the effectiveness of the family support intervention and generate knowledge of its implementability. Both types of evidence are necessary to determine whether the intervention works as intended in clinical practice and could be scaled up to other ICUs. The study findings will make a significant contribution to the current body of knowledge on effective ICU care that promotes family participation and well-being.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05280691 . Prospectively registered on 20 February 2022.

[Ways of supporting relatives in intensive care units : Overview and update]

BACKGROUND

Relatives of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) face a challenging situation: they often experience an existential crisis with great emotional stress and at the same time they are often actively involved in therapeutic decisions. The visiting restrictions of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have created new challenges in providing support to relatives.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this work is to present current and new developments in supporting relatives of critically ill patients in the form of a narrative review.

RESULTS

In recent years, numerous new approaches and projects to support relatives have been developed. They can be assigned to the following six areas: 1) presence of relatives in the ICU, 2) proactive involvement in care, 3) structured communication/information and online offers, 4) multidisciplinary cooperation, 5) organizational management and 6) follow-up offers. The evidence and the current implementation status of these measures are very heterogeneous internationally and nationally.

CONCLUSIONS

Measures for providing support for ICU relatives are diverse. Some can even be implemented despite visit bans. Recent digital developments enable virtual visits and a better exchange of information between the ICU team and relatives.

Family perspectives on facilitators and barriers to the set up and conduct of virtual visiting in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Post-Intensive Care Syndrome in Survivors from Critical Illness including COVID-19 Patients: A Narrative Review

Current achievements in medical science and technological advancements in intensive care medicine have allowed better support of critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICUs) and have increased survival probability. Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is a relatively new term introduced almost 10 years ago, defined as "new or worsening impairments in physical, cognitive, or mental health status arising after critical illness and persisting beyond acute care hospitalization". A significant percentage of critically ill patients suffer from PICS for a prolonged period of time, with physical problems being the most common. The exact prevalence of PICS is unknown, and many risk factors have been described well. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors seem to be at especially high risk for developing PICS. The families of ICU survivors can also be affected as a response to the stress suffered during the critical illness of their kin. This separate entity is described as PICS family (PICS-F). A multidisciplinary approach is warranted for the treatment of PICS, involving healthcare professionals, clinicians, and scientists from different areas. Improving outcomes is both challenging and imperative for the critical care community. The review of the relevant literature and the study of the physical, cognitive, and mental sequelae could lead to the prevention and timely management of PICS and the subsequent improvement of the quality of life for ICU survivors.