ReviewCureus2025
The Impact of Family Visits on Delirium in Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Delirium is an acute disturbance in attention and awareness that affects patients admitted to the ICUs, and its incidence is particularly high in mechanically ventilated patients. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact of liberalizing family visiting hours on reducing the incidence of delirium in adult ICU patients. A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. This review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing liberal or frequent family visiting strategies versus restrictive visiting policies in adult ICU patients. The primary outcome was the incidence of delirium in the ICU, which was assessed by the confusion assessment method (CAM) or Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC). It was prospectively registered with PROSPERO. The pooled analysis of four studies (512 delirium events among 2291 patients in the flexible group vs. 382 events among 1793 patients in the restricted group) found no statistically significant difference in delirium incidence between both groups (risk ratio (RR): 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.60-1.12; p=0.21), with substantial heterogeneity (I²=77%). This systematic review and meta-analysis found no significant reduction in the incidence of ICU delirium with liberal family visiting hours. The limitations of the review include methodological heterogeneity, high risk of bias, and variability in visitation protocols and delirium assessment methods among included studies. We recommend well-designed studies in the future to assess the true impact of flexible visiting polices in the ICU.
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.