ArticleAmerican journal of otolaryngology
Amplifying patient voices amid pandemic: Perspectives on tracheostomy care, communication, and connection.
Article in American journal of otolaryngology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing Equity in Tracheostomy Care with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2026Article
- Redefining Nursing in Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Care: Implications of the ICN's 2025 Definitions for an Evolving Specialty.ORL-head and neck nursing : official journal of the Society of Otorhinolaryngology and Head-Neck Nurses · 2026Article
- The Lived Experience of Individuals with a Tracheostomy and their Caregivers: A Qualitative Analysis.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2025Article
- A Shared Vision for Tracheostomy Care: How the ICN's Updated Framework Strengthens Collaboration.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2025Article
- Psychosocial Well-Being of Informal Caregivers of Adults Receiving Home Mechanical Ventilation: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Just Culture in a Fragmented System: Ethical and Quality Imperatives in Cross-Institutional Tracheostomy Care.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2025Article
- Tracheostomy Care in the Crosshairs: Supporting Science and Safety Nets in Tumultuous Times.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2025Article
- Addressing Education and Care Gaps in Tracheostomy Management: Insights from a Multi-Stakeholder Global Survey.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2025Article
- Healthcare Policy and Equity in Tracheostomy Care: Navigating Access, Advocacy, and Reform.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2024Article
- Enhancing Communication in Critically Ill Patients with a Tracheostomy: A Systematic Review of Evidence-Based Interventions and Outcomes.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2024Article
- Elevating Tracheostomy Care Through Data-Driven Innovation: What Can Education, Evidence-Based Practice, and Quality Improvement Learn from One Another?Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2024Article
- Allyship to Advance Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Otolaryngology: What We Can All Do.Current otorhinolaryngology reports · 2023Article
- Improving airway management and tracheostomy care through interprofessional collaboration: aligning timing, technique, and teamwork.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate perspectives of patients, family members, caregivers (PFC), and healthcare professionals (HCP) on tracheostomy care during the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsThe cross-sectional survey investigating barriers and facilitators to tracheostomy care was collaboratively developed by patients, family members, nurses, speech-language pathologists, respiratory care practitioners, physicians, and surgeons. The survey was distributed to the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative's learning community, and responses were analyzed.
resultsSurvey respondents (n = 191) from 17 countries included individuals with a tracheostomy (85 [45 %]), families/caregivers (43 [22 %]), and diverse HCP (63 [33.0 %]). Overall, 94 % of respondents reported concern that patients with tracheostomy were at increased risk of critical illness from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19; 93 % reported fear or anxiety. With respect to prioritization of care, 38 % of PFC versus 16 % of HCP reported concern that patients with tracheostomies might not be valued or prioritized (p = 0.002). Respondents also differed in fear of contracting COVID-19 (69 % PFC vs. 49 % HCP group, p = 0.009); concern for hospitalization (55.5 % PFC vs. 27 % HCP, p < 0.001); access to medical personnel (34 % PFC vs. 14 % HCP, p = 0.005); and concern about canceled appointments (62 % PFC vs. 41 % HCP, p = 0.01). Respondents from both groups reported severe stress and fatigue, sleep deprivation, lack of breaks, and lack of support (70 % PFC vs. 65 % HCP, p = 0.54). Virtual telecare seldom met perceived needs.
conclusionPFC with a tracheostomy perceived most risks more acutely than HCP in this global sample. Broad stakeholder engagement is necessary to achieve creative, patient-driven solutions to maintain connection, communication, and access for patients with a tracheostomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.