ArticleCureus2024
Healthcare Provider's Preferences on Open Versus Restricted Visiting Hours in Surgical Intensive Care Unit.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of visitation policies and family information practices in pediatric intensive care units in Turkey: a national survey.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Open-Door ICU Model and Humanized Care: A Systematic Review.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe increasing consideration of open visiting hours in intensive care units (ICUs) has presented implementation challenges. Recognizing the invaluable insights of healthcare providers, this study aimed to assess their perspectives on the potential impact of altering ICU visiting policies on patient care. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn a single-institution, cross-sectional study, a five-point Likert survey was administered to healthcare providers working in a surgical ICU to assess their perceptions of open and restricted visiting hours. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the responses.
resultsNinety-three healthcare providers participated, including nurses (53%), resident physicians (23%), and other healthcare professionals. The majority (81%) did not believe that open ICU visiting hours would enhance patient-centered care. Providers expressed concerns that open visitation could lead to increased provider stress (89%), physical barriers to patient access (80%), disruption in workflow (90%), and provider burnout (76%). Conversely, they perceived that restricted visitation would preserve patient privacy (87%), promote better healing for patients (64%), reduce provider stress (81%), and improve workflow (95%). Nurses were more likely than resident physicians to perceive that open ICU hours would alleviate familial stress (p=0.022). Additionally, both nurses and other healthcare providers recognized the potential for open ICU hours to improve communication between patient families and healthcare teams (p<0.05). Notably, there were no significant differences among providers in perceptions of the impact of open versus restricted visitation on provider stress, workflow, or other factors (p>0.05).
conclusionsThis survey reveals a negative perception of open ICU visiting hours among healthcare providers in a surgical ICU, with concerns that such a change could increase stress for both patients and providers. These findings underscore the potential challenges and negative impacts of implementing open visiting hours in this setting, emphasizing the need for careful consideration and further research to inform policy decisions and visitation practices.
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.