Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35120515›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2022

What does coercion in intensive care mean for patients and their relatives? A thematic qualitative study.

Susanne Jöbges, Corine Mouton Dorey, Rouven Porz, Bara Ricou, Nicola Biller-Andorno

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Communication with patients in the intensive care unit].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022
    Review
  6. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Susanne JöbgesInstitute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 30, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland. Susanne.joebges@ibme.uzh.ch.
Corine Mouton DoreyInstitute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 30, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland.
Rouven PorzUniversity Hospital Bern, 3010, FreiburgstrasseBern, Switzerland.
Bara RicouDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care, and Emergency Medicine, University Hospital of Geneva, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland.
Nicola Biller-AndornoInstitute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 30, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CHUniversity Hospital of Bern · CHUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe need for an ethical debate about the use of coercion in intensive care units (ICU) may not be as obvious as in other areas of medicine, such as psychiatry. Coercive measures are often necessary to treat critically ill patients in the ICU. It is nevertheless important to keep these measures to a minimum in order to respect the dignity of patients and the cohesion of the clinical team. A deeper understanding of what patients and their relatives perceive during their ICU stay will shed different light on intensive care management. Patients' experiences of loss of control, dependency and abandonment may lead to a new approach towards a broader approach to the concept of coercion in intensive care. The aim of our research is to explore the experiences of patients and relatives in the ICU and to determine when it might be possible to reduce feelings and memories of coercion.

methodsWe conducted and analysed 29 semi-structured interviews with patients and relatives who had been in the ICU a few months previously. Following a coding and categorisation process in MAXQDA™, a rigorous qualitative methodology was used to identify themes relevant to our research.

resultsFive main themes emerged: memory issues; interviewees' experiences of restricting measures and coercive treatment; patients' negative perception of situational and relational dependency with the risk of informal coercion; patients' perceptions of good care in a context of perceived dependency; progression from perception of coercion and dependency to respect for the person. All patients were grateful to have survived. However, coercion in the form of restraint, restriction of movement, and coercive treatment in the ICU was also acknowledged by patients and relatives. These included elements of informal coercion beyond restraints, such as a perceived negative sense of dependence, surrender, and asymmetrical interaction between the patient and health providers.

conclusionsTo capture the full range of patients' experiences of coercion, it is necessary to expand the concept of coercion to include less obvious forms of informal coercion that may occur in dependency situations. This will help identify solutions to avoid or reduce negative recollections that may persist long after discharge and negatively affect the patients' quality of life.

Indexed as

CoercionPsychiatryCritical CareHumansQualitative ResearchQuality of LifeAutonomyCoercionEthicsFormal–informalIntensive care unitPatient experiences

Identifiers

PMID35120515
PMCPMC8817558
OpenAlexW4210567099

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.