Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30374690›Full record

Trial reportIntensive care medicine2018

Questions to improve family-staff communication in the ICU: a randomized controlled trial.

Elie Azoulay, Jean-Marie Forel, Isabelle Vinatier, Romain Truillet, Anne Renault, Sandrine Valade, Samir Jaber, Jacques Durand-Gasselin, Carole Schwebel, Hughes Georges and 10 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02410538 (Frequently Asked Questions as an Help to Improve the Information of ICU Patients' Families.), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02410538 completednot on this map

Frequently Asked Questions as an Help to Improve the Information of ICU Patients' Families.

TypeobservationalSponsorAssistance Publique Hopitaux De MarseilleRan2014 to 2016Enrolled300ConditionsImprove the Understanding of the Diagnosis the Treatment and the Prognosis by One Member of the FamilyArmslist of "FAQ"
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Family Support Strategies During Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.

Elie AzoulayMedical Intensive Care Unit, APHP, Hôpital Saint-Louis, ECSTRA Team, and Clinical Epidemiology, UMR 1153 (Center of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité, CRESS), INSERM, Paris Diderot Sorbonne University, Paris, France. elie.azoulay@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8162-1508
Jean-Marie ForelMarseille AP-HM, Marseille Cedex 5, France.
Isabelle VinatierSurgical ICUs From Montpellier or Marseille Hospitals, Medical-Surgical ICUs From La Roche sur Yon, La Roche sur Yon, France.
Romain TruilletStatistical Department of Marseille, AP-HM, Marseille, France.
Anne RenaultBrest Hospital, Brest, France.
Sandrine ValadeMedical Intensive Care Unit, APHP, Hôpital Saint-Louis, ECSTRA Team, and Clinical Epidemiology, UMR 1153 (Center of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité, CRESS), INSERM, Paris Diderot Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Samir JaberMedical Intensive Care Unit, APHP, Hôpital Saint-Louis, ECSTRA Team, and Clinical Epidemiology, UMR 1153 (Center of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité, CRESS), INSERM, Paris Diderot Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Jacques Durand-GasselinToulon Hospital, Toulon, France.
Carole SchwebelGrenoble Hospital, Grenoble, France.
Hughes GeorgesTourcoing Hospital, Tourcoing, France.
Sybille MerceronVersailles Hospital, Le Chesnay, France.
Alain CariouMedical Intensive Care Unit, AP-HP, Cochin Hospital, Paris, France.
Myriam MoussaMarseille AP-HM, Marseille Cedex 5, France.
Sami HraiechMarseille AP-HM, Marseille Cedex 5, France.
Laurent ArgaudLyon Hospital, Lyon, France.
Marc LeoneMedical Intensive Care Unit, APHP, Hôpital Saint-Louis, ECSTRA Team, and Clinical Epidemiology, UMR 1153 (Center of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité, CRESS), INSERM, Paris Diderot Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
J Randall CurtisCambia Palliative Care Center of Excellence, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Nancy Kentish-BarnesMedical Intensive Care Unit, APHP, Hôpital Saint-Louis, ECSTRA Team, and Clinical Epidemiology, UMR 1153 (Center of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité, CRESS), INSERM, Paris Diderot Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Elisabeth JouveStatistical Department of Marseille, AP-HM, Marseille, France.
Laurent PapazianMarseille AP-HM, Marseille Cedex 5, France.
Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Marseille · FRInserm · FRCentre Hospitalier de Tourcoing · FRCentre Hospitalier Intercommunal Toulon-La Seyne-sur-Mer · FRCentre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Brest · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble · FRHôpital André Mignot · FRHôpital Cochin · FRHospices Civils de Lyon · FRRoche (France) · FRUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Ministère de la Santé France APHM MRS 2014 FAMIREA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRelatives of intensive care unit (ICU) patients suffer emotional distress that impairs their ability to acquire the information they need from the staff. We sought to evaluate whether providing relatives with a list of important questions was associated with better comprehension on day 5.

methodsRandomized, parallel-group trial. Relatives of mechanically ventilated patients were included from 14 hospitals belonging to the FAMIREA study group in France. A validated list of 21 questions was handed to the relatives immediately after randomization. The primary endpoint was comprehension on day 5. Secondary endpoints were satisfaction (Critical Care Family Needs Inventory, CCFNI) and symptoms of anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS).

resultsOf 394 randomized relatives, 302 underwent the day-5 assessment of all outcomes. Day-5 family comprehension was adequate in 68 (44.2%) and 75 (50.7%) intervention and control group relatives (P = 0.30), respectively. Over the first five ICU days, median number of family-staff meetings/patient was 6 [3-9], median total meeting time was 72.5 [35-110] min, and relatives asked a median of 20 [8-33] questions including 11 [6-13] from the list, with no between-group difference. Satisfaction and anxiety/depression symptoms were not significantly different between groups. The only variable significantly associated with better day-5 comprehension by multivariable analysis was a higher total number of questions asked before day 5.

conclusionsProviding relatives with a list of questions did not improve day-5 comprehension, secondary endpoints, or information time. Further research is needed to help families obtain the information they need.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02410538.

Indexed as

CommunicationComprehensionCritical CareProfessional-Family RelationsAdultAgedAnxietyDepressionEmotionsFamilyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRespiration, ArtificialStress, PsychologicalAnxietyBurdenCommunicationDepressionIntensive care unitStress

Identifiers

PMID30374690
OpenAlexW2899025572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.