Alexis Tabah FCICM, MD , Mahesh Ramanan FCICM, MMed , Kevin B. Laupland MD, PhD , Kimberley Haines PhD, B.HSc (Physio) , Naomi Hammond PhD , Serena Knowles PhD , Kylie Jacobs RN, M.Nr (Critical Care) , Stuart Baker MBBS, FCICM , Edward Litton MBChB, PhD , the Point Prevalence Program Investigators and Management Committee, The Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group and The George Institute for Global Health
{"title":"澳大利亚和新西兰重症监护病房的面对面、虚拟访问和电话:一项多点流行的多中心研究,绘制白天和夜间的相互作用。","authors":"Alexis Tabah FCICM, MD , Mahesh Ramanan FCICM, MMed , Kevin B. Laupland MD, PhD , Kimberley Haines PhD, B.HSc (Physio) , Naomi Hammond PhD , Serena Knowles PhD , Kylie Jacobs RN, M.Nr (Critical Care) , Stuart Baker MBBS, FCICM , Edward Litton MBChB, PhD , the Point Prevalence Program Investigators and Management Committee, The Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group and The George Institute for Global Health","doi":"10.1016/j.aucc.2024.101144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Family presence, in-person and via virtual visiting (video calls) and the telephone, is an integral part of patient- and family-centred critical care. Previous studies focussed on visiting policies and their effects. Data mapping the frequency and timing of these interactions are not available.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The aims of this study were to describe the prevalence of in-person visiting and the use of telephone or video conferencing in Australia and New Zealand intensive care units (ICUs).</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A point prevalence survey was conducted to map visiting policies, hourly family presence at the bedside, telephone or video calls, and reasons for each interaction.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>The research was conducted in a 24-h study period in October 2020, corresponding to the end of the 2nd COVID-19 pandemic wave in 40 Australia and New Zealand ICUs.</div></div><div><h3>Measurements and main results</h3><div>At the time of survey, 77% of ICUs had restrictions to visiting, median (interquartile range [IQR]) time of 9 (2; 24) hours with permitted visiting per day, a mean of 8 hours less than before the COVID-19 pandemic. There were 532 patients, a median (IQR) of 13 (6; 25) patients per ICU. Two patients had COVID-19. Over 24 h, 65% of patients had at least one in-person visit, median (IQR) of 1 (0; 3) hours with visitors. Telephone calls were received for 52% patients, median (IQR) of 1 (0; 2) calls. Video calls were received for 6% of the patients. In-person visits peaked between 10:00 and 12:00, with a second smaller peak between 16:00 and 17:00. Visiting continued through the evening, and 2% of the patients had visitors overnight. Telephone calls peaked at 10:00, continued through the day and evening, with few calls received overnight. In-person visits were predominantly motivated by family interactions (81%) and telephone calls by clinical updates (51%) and family interactions (47%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In a low COVID-19 prevalence period, Australia and New Zealand ICUs had partially reopened to visitors. Most visits happened during the day and evening but persisted overnight. ICU resourcing and visiting policies should take these data into account to facilitate family presence at the bedside, virtual visiting, and obtaining clinical updates via telephone.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51239,"journal":{"name":"Australian Critical Care","volume":"38 2","pages":"Article 101144"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In-person, virtual visiting and telephone calls in Australia and New Zealand intensive care units: A point prevalence multicentre study mapping daytime and nighttime interactions\",\"authors\":\"Alexis Tabah FCICM, MD , Mahesh Ramanan FCICM, MMed , Kevin B. Laupland MD, PhD , Kimberley Haines PhD, B.HSc (Physio) , Naomi Hammond PhD , Serena Knowles PhD , Kylie Jacobs RN, M.Nr (Critical Care) , Stuart Baker MBBS, FCICM , Edward Litton MBChB, PhD , the Point Prevalence Program Investigators and Management Committee, The Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group and The George Institute for Global Health\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.aucc.2024.101144\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Family presence, in-person and via virtual visiting (video calls) and the telephone, is an integral part of patient- and family-centred critical care. Previous studies focussed on visiting policies and their effects. Data mapping the frequency and timing of these interactions are not available.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The aims of this study were to describe the prevalence of in-person visiting and the use of telephone or video conferencing in Australia and New Zealand intensive care units (ICUs).</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A point prevalence survey was conducted to map visiting policies, hourly family presence at the bedside, telephone or video calls, and reasons for each interaction.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>The research was conducted in a 24-h study period in October 2020, corresponding to the end of the 2nd COVID-19 pandemic wave in 40 Australia and New Zealand ICUs.</div></div><div><h3>Measurements and main results</h3><div>At the time of survey, 77% of ICUs had restrictions to visiting, median (interquartile range [IQR]) time of 9 (2; 24) hours with permitted visiting per day, a mean of 8 hours less than before the COVID-19 pandemic. There were 532 patients, a median (IQR) of 13 (6; 25) patients per ICU. Two patients had COVID-19. Over 24 h, 65% of patients had at least one in-person visit, median (IQR) of 1 (0; 3) hours with visitors. Telephone calls were received for 52% patients, median (IQR) of 1 (0; 2) calls. Video calls were received for 6% of the patients. In-person visits peaked between 10:00 and 12:00, with a second smaller peak between 16:00 and 17:00. Visiting continued through the evening, and 2% of the patients had visitors overnight. Telephone calls peaked at 10:00, continued through the day and evening, with few calls received overnight. In-person visits were predominantly motivated by family interactions (81%) and telephone calls by clinical updates (51%) and family interactions (47%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In a low COVID-19 prevalence period, Australia and New Zealand ICUs had partially reopened to visitors. Most visits happened during the day and evening but persisted overnight. ICU resourcing and visiting policies should take these data into account to facilitate family presence at the bedside, virtual visiting, and obtaining clinical updates via telephone.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51239,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Critical Care\",\"volume\":\"38 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 101144\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1036731424002959\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1036731424002959","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
In-person, virtual visiting and telephone calls in Australia and New Zealand intensive care units: A point prevalence multicentre study mapping daytime and nighttime interactions
Background
Family presence, in-person and via virtual visiting (video calls) and the telephone, is an integral part of patient- and family-centred critical care. Previous studies focussed on visiting policies and their effects. Data mapping the frequency and timing of these interactions are not available.
Objectives
The aims of this study were to describe the prevalence of in-person visiting and the use of telephone or video conferencing in Australia and New Zealand intensive care units (ICUs).
Design
A point prevalence survey was conducted to map visiting policies, hourly family presence at the bedside, telephone or video calls, and reasons for each interaction.
Setting
The research was conducted in a 24-h study period in October 2020, corresponding to the end of the 2nd COVID-19 pandemic wave in 40 Australia and New Zealand ICUs.
Measurements and main results
At the time of survey, 77% of ICUs had restrictions to visiting, median (interquartile range [IQR]) time of 9 (2; 24) hours with permitted visiting per day, a mean of 8 hours less than before the COVID-19 pandemic. There were 532 patients, a median (IQR) of 13 (6; 25) patients per ICU. Two patients had COVID-19. Over 24 h, 65% of patients had at least one in-person visit, median (IQR) of 1 (0; 3) hours with visitors. Telephone calls were received for 52% patients, median (IQR) of 1 (0; 2) calls. Video calls were received for 6% of the patients. In-person visits peaked between 10:00 and 12:00, with a second smaller peak between 16:00 and 17:00. Visiting continued through the evening, and 2% of the patients had visitors overnight. Telephone calls peaked at 10:00, continued through the day and evening, with few calls received overnight. In-person visits were predominantly motivated by family interactions (81%) and telephone calls by clinical updates (51%) and family interactions (47%).
Conclusions
In a low COVID-19 prevalence period, Australia and New Zealand ICUs had partially reopened to visitors. Most visits happened during the day and evening but persisted overnight. ICU resourcing and visiting policies should take these data into account to facilitate family presence at the bedside, virtual visiting, and obtaining clinical updates via telephone.
期刊介绍:
Australian Critical Care is the official journal of the Australian College of Critical Care Nurses (ACCCN). It is a bi-monthly peer-reviewed journal, providing clinically relevant research, reviews and articles of interest to the critical care community. Australian Critical Care publishes peer-reviewed scholarly papers that report research findings, research-based reviews, discussion papers and commentaries which are of interest to an international readership of critical care practitioners, educators, administrators and researchers. Interprofessional articles are welcomed.