Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33422153›Full record

ArticleJournal of intensive care2021

Psychological effects of remote-only communication among reference persons of ICU patients during COVID-19 pandemic.

Jessy Cattelan, Sara Castellano, Hamid Merdji, Jean Audusseau, Baptiste Claude, Léa Feuillassier, Sibylle Cunat, Marc Astrié, Camille Aquin, Guillaume Buis and 9 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intensive care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04385121 (Psychological Impact of the Hospitalization of a Family Member in Intensive Care for Covid-19 Infection), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04385121 completednot on this map

Psychological Impact of the Hospitalization of a Family Member in Intensive Care for Covid-19 Infection

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital, Strasbourg, FranceRan2020 to 2020Enrolled88ConditionsCovid-19, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Anxiety, DepressionArmsQuestionnary
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A telepresence robot in the room of a COVID-19 patient can provide virtual family presence.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2021
    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

19 authors.

Jessy CattelanService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Sara CastellanoSuLiSoM UR 3071, Faculté de Psychologie, Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Hamid MerdjiService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Jean AudusseauLPC UR 4440, Faculté de Psychologie, Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Baptiste ClaudeService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Léa FeuillassierService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Sibylle CunatService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Marc AstriéService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Camille AquinService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Guillaume BuisService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Edgar GehantService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Amandine GranierService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Hassiba KerchaService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Camille Le GuillouService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Guillaume MartinService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Kevin RoulotService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Ferhat MezianiService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Olivier PutoisSuLiSoM UR 3071, Faculté de Psychologie, Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Julie HelmsService de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. Julie.helms@chru-strasbourg.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring COVID-19 pandemic, visits have been prohibited in most French ICUs. Psychological effects, for reference persons (RPs), of remote-only communication have been assessed.

methodsAll RPs of patients referred to ICU for COVID-19 were included. HADS, IES-R, and satisfaction were evaluated at admission, discharge/death, and 3 months. At 3 months, a psychologist provided a qualitative description of RPs' psychological distress.

resultsEighty-eight RPs were included. Prevalence of anxiety and depression was 83% and 73% respectively. At 3 months, lower HADS decrease was associated with patient death/continued hospitalization, and/or sleeping disorders in RPs (p < 0.01). Ninety-nine percent RPs felt the patient was safe (9 [7; 10]/10 points, Likert-type scale), confident with caregivers (10 [9; 10]/10 points), and satisfied with information provided (10 [9; 10]/10 points). All RPs stressed the specific-type of "responsibility" associated with being an RP in a remote-only context, leading RPs to develop narrow diffusion strategies (67%) and restrict the array of contacted relatives to a very few and/or only contacting them rarely. 10 RPs (30%) related the situation to a prior traumatic experience.

conclusionRPs experienced psychological distress and reported that being an RP in a remote-only communication context was a specific responsibility and qualified it as an overall negative experience.

trial registrationNCT04385121 . Registered 12 May 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ .

Indexed as

COVID-19; Reference person; Relative; Anxiety; Depression; Distress

Identifiers

PMID33422153
PMCPMC7794617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.