Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36382337›Full record

ArticleCritical care explorations2022

Family Presence on Rounds in Adult Critical Care: A Scoping Review.

Alexander Calderone, Vanessa Debay, Michael J Goldfarb

Registry-linked trialAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care explorations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05891860 (Virtual Family Participation in ICU Rounds), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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.

NCT05891860 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Virtual Family Participation in ICU Rounds (The VR-Family Study)

TypeinterventionalSponsorLady Davis InstituteRan2023 to 2024Enrolled84ConditionsFamily Engagement, Virtual, Critical CareArmsParticipation in virtual rounds
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Post-ICU Care: Why, What, When and How? ISCCM Position Statement.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors.

Alexander CalderoneDepartment of Medicine, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Vanessa DebayMcGill Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Michael J GoldfarbDivision of Cardiology, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Family presence on rounds involves allowing family members to participate in daily healthcare team rounds and is recommended by critical care professional societies. Yet, family presence on rounds is not performed in many institutions. There is a need to synthesize the current evidence base for this practice to inform healthcare providers of the potential benefits and challenges of this approach. The main objective of this study was to explore the impact of family presence on adult ICU rounds on family and healthcare providers. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Library, and PubMed databases were last searched on January 28, 2022. Studies published during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. STUDY SELECTION: Studies involving family presence during rounds that included family or healthcare provider perspectives or outcomes were selected. There were no limitations on study design. DATA EXTRACTION: Qualitative and quantitative family and provider perspectives, barriers and challenges to family presence, and study outcomes were extracted from studies. The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis published guidelines were followed. DATA SYNTHESIS: There were 16 studies included. Family reported family presence on rounds as a means of information transfer and an opportunity to ask care-related questions. Family presence on rounds was associated with increased family satisfaction with care, physician comfort, and improved physician-family relationship. Healthcare providers reported a positive perception of family presence on rounds but were concerned about patient confidentiality and perceived efficacy of rounds. Family presence was found to increase rounding time and was felt to negatively impact teaching and opportunities for academic discussions.

conclusionsFamily presence on rounds has potential advantages for family and healthcare providers, but important challenges exist. Further studies are needed to understand how to best implement family presence on adult ICU rounds.

Indexed as

critical carefamilyprofessional-family relationsteaching rounds

Identifiers

PMID36382337
PMCPMC9646504

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.