Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35519910›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2022

Visiting and Communication Policy in Intensive Care Units during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-sectional Survey from South Asia and the Middle East.

Gunjan Chanchalani, Nitin Arora, Prashant Nasa, Kanwalpreet Sodhi, Maher J Al Bahrani, Ashraf Al Tayar, Madiha Hashmi, Vinod Jaiswal, Sandeep Kantor, Ahsina J Lopa and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Critical care and pandemic preparedness and response.British journal of anaesthesia · 2023
    Review
  6. The Effect of Video Call with Family Members on Physiological Parameters of Critically Ill Patients in Intensive Care Unit: A Quasi-experimental Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    Article
  7. Assessment of Family Satisfaction with Remote Communication for Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: An Observational Cohort Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Visitors in the Intensive Care Unit in the COVID Era.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022
    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

17 authors.

Gunjan ChanchalaniDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumballa Hill Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8429-8526
Nitin AroraDepartment of Intensive Care, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, West Midlands, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9941-8340
Prashant NasaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, NMC Specialty Hospital, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1948-4060
Kanwalpreet SodhiDeep Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7377-9225
Maher J Al BahraniDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Royal Hospital, Muscat, Oman.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9177-521X
Ashraf Al TayarDepartment of ICU, Security Force Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2897-7417
Madiha HashmiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Ziauddin University and Dr Ziauddin Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7332-0692
Vinod JaiswalDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Amina Hospital, Ajman, United Arab Emirates.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8365-6758
Sandeep KantorDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Royal Hospital, Muscat, Oman.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4491-6198
Ahsina J LopaDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, MH Samorita Hospital and Medical College, Tejgaon, Dhaka, Bangladesh.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5336-4217
Bassam MansourDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine and Critical Care Medicine, Zahraa Hospital University Medical Center/Lebanese University, Faculty of Medical Science, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5640-0631
Anushka D MudaligeDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, North Colombo Teaching Hospital, Ragama, Sri Lanka.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5264-1585
Rashid NadeemDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Dubai Hospital, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3785-2832
Gentle S ShresthaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital, Lalitpur, Nepal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0385-2340
Ahmed R TahaDepartment of Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7901-9553
Melda TürkoğluDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Critical Care, Gazi University, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4043-7082
Dameera WeeratungaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, National Hospital of Sri Lanka, Colombo, Sri Lanka.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5899-3741

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had affected the visiting or communicating policies for family members. We surveyed the intensive care units (ICUs) in South Asia and the Middle East to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on visiting and communication policies. Materials and method: A web-based cross-sectional survey was used to collect data between March 22, 2021, and April 7, 2021, from healthcare professionals (HCP) working in COVID and non-COVID ICUs (one response per ICU). The topics of the questionnaire included current and pre-pandemic policies on visiting, communication, informed consent, and end-of-life care in ICUs. Results: A total of 292 ICUs (73% of COVID ICUs) from 18 countries were included in the final analysis. Most (92%) of ICUs restricted their visiting hours, and nearly one-third (32.3%) followed a "no-visitor" policy. There was a significant change in the daily visiting duration in COVID ICUs compared to the pre-pandemic times ( Conclusion: Visiting and communication policies of the ICUs had significantly changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Future studies are needed to understand the sociopsychological and medicolegal implications of revised policies. How to cite this article: Chanchalani G, Arora N, Nasa P, Sodhi K, Al Bahrani MJ, Al Tayar A,

Indexed as

Communication barrierDo not resuscitate ordersEnd-of-life careFamily communicationInformed consentInformed consent documentPatient visitorsTerminal careVisitors to patients

Identifiers

PMID35519910
PMCPMC9015923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.