Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34151284›Full record

ArticleCritical care explorations2021

Humanizing the ICU Patient: A Qualitative Exploration of Behaviors Experienced by Patients, Caregivers, and ICU Staff.

Melissa J Basile, Eileen Rubin, Michael E Wilson, Jennifer Polo, Sonia N Jacome, Samuel M Brown, Gabriel Heras La Calle, Victor M Montori, Negin Hajizadeh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care explorations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Humanity-based nursing care in the ICU: a descriptive qualitative study.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Melissa J BasileDivision of Pulmonary Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, Hempstead, NY.
Eileen RubinARDS Foundation, Northbrook, IL.
Michael E WilsonDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Jennifer PoloDivision of Pulmonary Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, Hempstead, NY.
Sonia N JacomeDivision of Pulmonary Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, Hempstead, NY.
Samuel M BrownCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, UT.
Gabriel Heras La CalleHospital Universitario de Torrejón, Madrid, Spain.
Victor M MontoriKnowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Negin HajizadehDivision of Pulmonary Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, Hempstead, NY.
Mayo Clinic in Florida · USIntermountain Medical Center · USUnidades Centrales Científico-Técnicas · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo understand how patients and family members experience dehumanizing or humanizing treatment when in the ICU.

designQualitative study included web-based focus groups and open-ended surveys posted to ICU patient/family social media boards. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. Social media responses were collected and organized by stakeholder group. Data underwent qualitative analysis.

settingRemote focus groups and online surveys. PATIENTS: ICU patient survivors, family members, and ICU teams.

interventionsNot available. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsSemi-structured questions and open-ended survey responses. We enrolled 40 patients/family members and 31 ICU team members. Focus groups and surveys revealed three primary themes orienting humanizing/dehumanizing ICU experiences: 1) communication, 2) outcomes, and 3) causes of dehumanization. Dehumanization occurred during "communication" exchanges when ICU team members talked "over" patients, made distressing remarks when patients were present, or failed to inform patients about ICU-related care. "Outcomes" of dehumanization were associated with patient loss of trust in the medical team, loss of motivation to participate in ICU recovery, feeling of distress, guilt, depression, and anxiety. Humanizing behaviors were associated with improved recovery, well-being, and trust. "Perceived causes" of dehumanizing behaviors were linked to patient, ICU team, and healthcare system factors.

conclusionsBehaviors of ICU clinicians may cause patients and families to feel dehumanized when in the ICU. Negative behaviors are noticed by patients and families, possibly contributing to poor outcomes including mental health, recovery, and lack of trust in ICU teams. Supporting ICU clinicians may enable a more empathic environment and in turn more humanizing clinician-patient encounters.

Indexed as

communicationcritical illnessintensive care unitqualitative studystakeholder perceptions

Identifiers

PMID34151284
PMCPMC8208441
OpenAlexW3176105866

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.