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。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Australian Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1016/j.aucc.2024.101144
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 ,&nbsp;Mahesh Ramanan FCICM, MMed ,&nbsp;Kevin B. Laupland MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Kimberley Haines PhD, B.HSc (Physio) ,&nbsp;Naomi Hammond PhD ,&nbsp;Serena Knowles PhD ,&nbsp;Kylie Jacobs RN, M.Nr (Critical Care) ,&nbsp;Stuart Baker MBBS, FCICM ,&nbsp;Edward Litton MBChB, PhD ,&nbsp;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 ,&nbsp;Mahesh Ramanan FCICM, MMed ,&nbsp;Kevin B. Laupland MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Kimberley Haines PhD, B.HSc (Physio) ,&nbsp;Naomi Hammond PhD ,&nbsp;Serena Knowles PhD ,&nbsp;Kylie Jacobs RN, M.Nr (Critical Care) ,&nbsp;Stuart Baker MBBS, FCICM ,&nbsp;Edward Litton MBChB, PhD ,&nbsp;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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:家庭的存在,亲自和通过虚拟访问(视频通话)和电话,是病人和家庭为中心的重症监护的一个组成部分。以往的研究主要集中在访问政策及其影响上。这些相互作用的频率和时间的映射数据是不可用的。目的:本研究的目的是描述在澳大利亚和新西兰的重症监护病房(icu)中亲自访问和使用电话或视频会议的流行程度。设计:进行点患病率调查,以绘制访问政策、每小时家庭在床边的出现、电话或视频通话以及每次互动的原因。研究背景:研究时间为2020年10月24小时,与澳大利亚和新西兰40个icu的第二次COVID-19大流行结束相对应。测量结果及主要结果:调查时,77%的icu有探视限制,中位数(四分位数间距[IQR])时间为9 (2;每天允许探视的时间为24小时,比COVID-19大流行前平均减少8小时。532例患者,中位(IQR)为13 (6;25)每个ICU患者。两名患者感染了COVID-19。在24小时内,65%的患者至少有一次亲自就诊,中位数(IQR)为1 (0;3)接待游客的时间。52%的患者接到电话,中位数(IQR)为1 (0;2)调用。6%的患者接受了视频通话。亲自访问的高峰在10:00至12:00之间,第二个较小的高峰在16:00至17:00之间。探视持续到晚上,2%的病人有过夜的探视者。电话在10点达到高峰,一直持续到白天和晚上,一夜之间接到的电话很少。亲自就诊的动机主要是家庭互动(81%),打电话的动机主要是临床更新(51%)和家庭互动(47%)。结论:在新冠肺炎低流行期,澳大利亚和新西兰的icu部分重新开放。大多数访问发生在白天和晚上,但持续到晚上。ICU的资源和访问政策应考虑到这些数据,以促进家庭在床边,虚拟访问,并通过电话获得临床更新。
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
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.
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
Australian Critical Care
Australian Critical Care NURSING-NURSING
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
148
审稿时长
>12 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Prevalence and variability in use of physical restraints in intensive care units: A systematic review and meta-analysis Effects of prophylactic non-invasive ventilation on weaning: A systematic review with meta-analysis Harnessing machine learning for predicting successful weaning from mechanical ventilation: A systematic review Multicentre prospective study to establish a risk prediction model on pressure injury in the neonatal intensive and intermediate care units Effects of compassion fatigue, structural empowerment, and psychological empowerment on the caring behaviours of intensive care unit nurses in China: A structural equation modelling analysis
×
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