沙特阿拉伯重症监护病房患者家属满意度评估:一项横断面研究

IF 1.8 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Critical Care Research and Practice Pub Date : 2024-10-23 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2024/8481083
Abdullah Shbeer, Mohammed Ageel
{"title":"沙特阿拉伯重症监护病房患者家属满意度评估:一项横断面研究","authors":"Abdullah Shbeer, Mohammed Ageel","doi":"10.1155/2024/8481083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Regularly measuring family satisfaction with intensive care unit (ICU) experience is crucial for ensuring high-quality care and identifying areas for improvement. This study aimed to evaluate family satisfaction with the ICU in Saudi Arabia. <b>Methods:</b> A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 248 family members of patients admitted to various ICUs. The survey assessed family satisfaction via a validated questionnaire, the Critical Care Family Satisfaction Survey (CCFSS), which includes five subscales: assurance, information, comfort, proximity, and support. Demographic data were also collected. Descriptive and inferential statistics were calculated. <b>Results:</b> The demographic distribution revealed that a majority of the participants were female (70.97%, <i>n</i> = 176), with the relationships with the patients predominantly being parents (41.94%, <i>n</i> = 104) or offspring (33.87%, <i>n</i> = 84). The overall satisfaction score was 3.79 ± 1.26, with 66.13% of the participants reporting high satisfaction, 20.97% reporting intermediate satisfaction, and 12.90% reporting low satisfaction. The mean subscale scores were as follows: assurance (3.82 ± 1.2), information (3.83 ± 1.25), comfort (3.81 ± 1.27), proximity (3.72 ± 1.28), and support (3.78 ± 1.28). The highest satisfaction scores were observed for sharing in decisions, noise levels, and staff honesty, whereas the lowest scores were for visiting hours flexibility, transfer preparation, and staff responsiveness. Males reported significantly greater satisfaction (4.24 ± 1.20) than females did (3.61 ± 1.11, <i>p</i> = 0.007). <b>Conclusions:</b> This study revealed moderate to high levels of family satisfaction with the ICU, with significant differences based on sex. The findings highlight the importance of effective communication, family involvement in decision-making, and supportive ICU policies. ICUs should regularly assess family satisfaction and use the results to guide quality improvement efforts, with a focus on areas with lower satisfaction scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":46583,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Research and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11524694/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Satisfaction Levels Among Families of Intensive Care Unit Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Abdullah Shbeer, Mohammed Ageel\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2024/8481083\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Regularly measuring family satisfaction with intensive care unit (ICU) experience is crucial for ensuring high-quality care and identifying areas for improvement. This study aimed to evaluate family satisfaction with the ICU in Saudi Arabia. <b>Methods:</b> A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 248 family members of patients admitted to various ICUs. The survey assessed family satisfaction via a validated questionnaire, the Critical Care Family Satisfaction Survey (CCFSS), which includes five subscales: assurance, information, comfort, proximity, and support. Demographic data were also collected. Descriptive and inferential statistics were calculated. <b>Results:</b> The demographic distribution revealed that a majority of the participants were female (70.97%, <i>n</i> = 176), with the relationships with the patients predominantly being parents (41.94%, <i>n</i> = 104) or offspring (33.87%, <i>n</i> = 84). The overall satisfaction score was 3.79 ± 1.26, with 66.13% of the participants reporting high satisfaction, 20.97% reporting intermediate satisfaction, and 12.90% reporting low satisfaction. The mean subscale scores were as follows: assurance (3.82 ± 1.2), information (3.83 ± 1.25), comfort (3.81 ± 1.27), proximity (3.72 ± 1.28), and support (3.78 ± 1.28). The highest satisfaction scores were observed for sharing in decisions, noise levels, and staff honesty, whereas the lowest scores were for visiting hours flexibility, transfer preparation, and staff responsiveness. Males reported significantly greater satisfaction (4.24 ± 1.20) than females did (3.61 ± 1.11, <i>p</i> = 0.007). <b>Conclusions:</b> This study revealed moderate to high levels of family satisfaction with the ICU, with significant differences based on sex. The findings highlight the importance of effective communication, family involvement in decision-making, and supportive ICU policies. ICUs should regularly assess family satisfaction and use the results to guide quality improvement efforts, with a focus on areas with lower satisfaction scores.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46583,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care Research and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11524694/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Care Research and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/8481083\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/8481083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:定期测量家属对重症监护病房(ICU)体验的满意度对于确保高质量护理和确定需要改进的方面至关重要。本研究旨在评估沙特阿拉伯重症监护病房的家属满意度。方法:对入住不同重症监护病房的 248 名患者家属进行了横向调查。调查通过一份经过验证的问卷--重症监护家属满意度调查(CCFSS)来评估家属的满意度,该问卷包括五个分量表:保证、信息、舒适、接近和支持。此外,还收集了人口统计学数据。计算了描述性和推论性统计数据。结果人口统计学分布显示,大多数参与者为女性(70.97%,n = 176),与患者的关系主要是父母(41.94%,n = 104)或后代(33.87%,n = 84)。总体满意度为 3.79 ± 1.26 分,66.13% 的参与者表示高度满意,20.97% 表示中度满意,12.90% 表示低度满意。各分量表的平均得分如下:保证(3.82 ± 1.2)、信息(3.83 ± 1.25)、舒适(3.81 ± 1.27)、接近(3.72 ± 1.28)和支持(3.78 ± 1.28)。满意度最高的是共同决策、噪音水平和工作人员的诚实,而满意度最低的是探视时间的灵活性、转院准备和工作人员的反应能力。男性的满意度(4.24 ± 1.20)明显高于女性(3.61 ± 1.11,p = 0.007)。结论:本研究显示,家属对重症监护室的满意度为中高水平,但性别差异显著。研究结果凸显了有效沟通、家属参与决策和 ICU 支持性政策的重要性。重症监护室应定期评估家属满意度,并利用评估结果指导质量改进工作,重点关注满意度较低的领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessment of Satisfaction Levels Among Families of Intensive Care Unit Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: Regularly measuring family satisfaction with intensive care unit (ICU) experience is crucial for ensuring high-quality care and identifying areas for improvement. This study aimed to evaluate family satisfaction with the ICU in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 248 family members of patients admitted to various ICUs. The survey assessed family satisfaction via a validated questionnaire, the Critical Care Family Satisfaction Survey (CCFSS), which includes five subscales: assurance, information, comfort, proximity, and support. Demographic data were also collected. Descriptive and inferential statistics were calculated. Results: The demographic distribution revealed that a majority of the participants were female (70.97%, n = 176), with the relationships with the patients predominantly being parents (41.94%, n = 104) or offspring (33.87%, n = 84). The overall satisfaction score was 3.79 ± 1.26, with 66.13% of the participants reporting high satisfaction, 20.97% reporting intermediate satisfaction, and 12.90% reporting low satisfaction. The mean subscale scores were as follows: assurance (3.82 ± 1.2), information (3.83 ± 1.25), comfort (3.81 ± 1.27), proximity (3.72 ± 1.28), and support (3.78 ± 1.28). The highest satisfaction scores were observed for sharing in decisions, noise levels, and staff honesty, whereas the lowest scores were for visiting hours flexibility, transfer preparation, and staff responsiveness. Males reported significantly greater satisfaction (4.24 ± 1.20) than females did (3.61 ± 1.11, p = 0.007). Conclusions: This study revealed moderate to high levels of family satisfaction with the ICU, with significant differences based on sex. The findings highlight the importance of effective communication, family involvement in decision-making, and supportive ICU policies. ICUs should regularly assess family satisfaction and use the results to guide quality improvement efforts, with a focus on areas with lower satisfaction scores.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Care Research and Practice
Critical Care Research and Practice CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of Satisfaction Levels Among Families of Intensive Care Unit Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Serum Concentration at 24 h With Intensive Beta-Lactam Therapy in Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Prospective Study: Beta-Lactam Blood Levels in Sepsis. Assessing the Impact of Simulation-Based Learning on Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Critical Care Medicine. A Comparison of the Outcomes of COVID-19 Vaccinated and Nonvaccinated Patients Admitted to an Intensive Care Unit in a Low-Middle-Income Country. Dyschloremia and Renal Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: A Prospective Cohort Study: Dyschloremia and Renal Outcomes in Sepsis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1