ArticleInternational journal of nursing studies advances2026
Mechanically ventilated patients' Experiences of communication using eye-tracking technology: A qualitative descriptive study.
Article in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Effective communication with mechanically ventilated awake patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is a major challenge. Invasive mechanical ventilation deprives patients of their ability to communicate and hinders nurse-patient communication. Effective communication is an important step in building the nurse-patient relationship. Communication tools such as eye-tracking devices have the potential to improve communication between ICU nurses and patients. Objective: The aim of this paper was to explore the use of eye-tracking technology for nurse-patient communication with mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU, and to inform its improved implementation in this setting. Methods: Using a descriptive qualitative design and following the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ). Semi-structured interviews were conducted from February to May 2025 with 16 mechanically ventilated patients who communicated using eye-tracking devices at least three times during their hospitalization at a hospital in Henan Province. Thematic analysis was employed, guided by the framework developed by Braun and Clarke. Results: Three themes were identified: Technical interaction experience, Psychological experience, and the Barriers to using the device. This paper found that eye-tracking devices were feasible in communicating basic needs and provided psycho-emotional benefits. Patients were able to regain a sense of engagement, engage in emotionally supportive interactions, and feel psychologically safe. However, factors such as physiologic fatigue and environmental conditions created barriers to optimal use of the devices. Conclusion: Eye-tracking technology can serve as a valuable supportive tool for nurse-patient communication in the ICU. It empowers patients to participate in their daily care and facilitates emotionally supportive interactions. However, barriers to implementation must be addressed to optimize its effectiveness. Future efforts should focus on refining these communication tools based on these findings to ensure that critically ill patients can fully benefit from them. Implications for clinical practice: Eye-tracking devices are used as communication aids to help intubated or tracheostomy patients express basic needs and participate in their own care. To ensure communication effectiveness, clinical practice needs to be optimized in various ways, such as optimizing device performance and providing systematic training and support for caregivers to deal with barriers to device use.
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.