ArticleNursing in critical care2025
Communication difficulties in mechanically ventilated voiceless patients in intensive care units: A qualitative study.
Article in Nursing in critical care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Stage-Based Psychosocial Adaptation Model for Lung Transplantation (SPA-LT): A Proposed Longitudinal Conceptual Framework for Clinical Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- High-Tech Augmentative and Alternative Communication in a Burn Patient With Voicelessness: A Case Study.Nursing in critical care · 2026Article
- Communication difficulties in mechanically ventilated voiceless patients in intensive care units: A qualitative study.Nursing in critical care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMechanically ventilated patients are unable to verbally communicate due to the endotracheal tube or tracheostomy, rendering them temporarily 'voiceless'. More and more patients are conscious during mechanical ventilation because of a new paradigm based on mild/no sedation. Communicating with conscious voiceless patients can be complex and frustrating, leading to negative outcomes and experiences for patients, family members and health care professionals.
aimTo explore the negative effects of the inability to communicate verbally among voiceless patients in intensive care units (ICUs), considering the perspectives of voiceless patients, health care professionals and family members. STUDY
designThis qualitative study uses Interpretive Description methodology. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients, family members and health care professionals. Data were collected at three ICUs in Italy over 3 months. Data were analysed using the Rapid and Rigorous qualitative data analysis.
resultsForty-three people were interviewed (10 patients, 13 caregivers, 13 nurses and 7 physicians). Three major themes were identified: perception of communication difficulties, negative impacts on relationships and emotions, and negative effects on care. These findings indicate that communication difficulties in ICU have negative emotional and psychological consequences for all participants and the health care provided.
conclusionsEffective communication with voiceless patients is essential for their well-being and quality of care. Future research should focus on identifying and evaluating tailored communication methods for voiceless patients. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study emphasizes the importance of interventions improving voiceless communication, including training health care professionals and critical care nurses in alternative communication strategies, providing psychological support to voiceless patients, and encouraging extended family presence.
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.