2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/157169
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Family Presence during Procedures in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit
Author(s):
Robertson, Tammy; Guzzetta, Cathie; Shields, Kerry
Author Details:
Tammy Robertson, Children's Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA, email: robertson14@juno.com; Cathie Guzzetta; Kerry Shields
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The dual aims of the study were to determine whether a family presence protocol based on Emergency Nurses Association (ENA) guidelines facilitates uninterrupted patient care and appropriate family behavior at the bedside; and to describe attitudes and experiences of family members and healthcare providers present during invasive procedures in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). BACKGROUND: Studies from emergency departments have shown that family members need to be near the patient during procedures and resuscitation. Organizations including the ENA, the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN), and the American Heart Association have endorsed family presence (FP) during CPR or invasive procedures. Few studies have examined FP during procedures or in critical care areas, and none have explored the feasibility of applying ENA guidelines for FP. METHODS: ENA guidelines for FP were utilized. This descriptive-exploratory study conducted in a 22-bed Trauma/Neurosurgical PICU surveyed 80 different family members and direct healthcare providers (HCP) with response rate 97% for families and 93% for HCP. Three data collection tools were used. The PICU Family Presence Protocol Data Collection Form was completed by the facilitator who supported families during FP. The PICU Family Presence Family Member Survey and the PICU Family Presence Healthcare Provider Survey were completed by families and staff, respectively. Means, frequency distributions, ANOVAs, t-tests, correlations, and Cohen's k were analyzed utilizing SAS 9.1.3. RESULTS: Twenty-six families were eligible for FP experiences. In two cases, the family declined to stay and in another the physician did not agree to FP. Thirty procedures were performed on the 23 included patients. Family facilitators reported no disruptive behavior or interruption in care and commented that families helped the patient cope during the procedure. All parents believed they had a right to be present, and 97% felt FP gave them peace of mind and would choose to be present again. All healthcare providers agreed that the outcome of the procedure was not affected by FP, and 87% supported FP during procedures. Ninety-two percent of HCP would agree to FP again. CONCLUSIONS: ENA guidelines include an appropriate screening tool for FP. With the support of a family facilitator, FP during procedures in the PICU is feasible and does not lead to interruptions in care. Family members believe they have a right to be present during procedures and HCP reported minimal or no effect on their practice with family present. Family presence is an effective way to promote patient- and family-centered care in the critical care setting.
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
26-Oct-2011
Citation:
2009 National Teaching Institute Research Abstracts. American Journal of Critical Care, 18(3), e1-e17.
Conference Date:
2009
Conference Name:
National Teaching Institute and Critical Care Exposition
Conference Host:
American Association of Critical-Care Nurses
Conference Location:
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_GB
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleFamily Presence during Procedures in the Pediatric Intensive Care Uniten_GB
dc.contributor.authorRobertson, Tammyen_GB
dc.contributor.authorGuzzetta, Cathieen_GB
dc.contributor.authorShields, Kerryen_GB
dc.author.detailsTammy Robertson, Children's Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA, email: robertson14@juno.com; Cathie Guzzetta; Kerry Shieldsen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/157169-
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: The dual aims of the study were to determine whether a family presence protocol based on Emergency Nurses Association (ENA) guidelines facilitates uninterrupted patient care and appropriate family behavior at the bedside; and to describe attitudes and experiences of family members and healthcare providers present during invasive procedures in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). BACKGROUND: Studies from emergency departments have shown that family members need to be near the patient during procedures and resuscitation. Organizations including the ENA, the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN), and the American Heart Association have endorsed family presence (FP) during CPR or invasive procedures. Few studies have examined FP during procedures or in critical care areas, and none have explored the feasibility of applying ENA guidelines for FP. METHODS: ENA guidelines for FP were utilized. This descriptive-exploratory study conducted in a 22-bed Trauma/Neurosurgical PICU surveyed 80 different family members and direct healthcare providers (HCP) with response rate 97% for families and 93% for HCP. Three data collection tools were used. The PICU Family Presence Protocol Data Collection Form was completed by the facilitator who supported families during FP. The PICU Family Presence Family Member Survey and the PICU Family Presence Healthcare Provider Survey were completed by families and staff, respectively. Means, frequency distributions, ANOVAs, t-tests, correlations, and Cohen's k were analyzed utilizing SAS 9.1.3. RESULTS: Twenty-six families were eligible for FP experiences. In two cases, the family declined to stay and in another the physician did not agree to FP. Thirty procedures were performed on the 23 included patients. Family facilitators reported no disruptive behavior or interruption in care and commented that families helped the patient cope during the procedure. All parents believed they had a right to be present, and 97% felt FP gave them peace of mind and would choose to be present again. All healthcare providers agreed that the outcome of the procedure was not affected by FP, and 87% supported FP during procedures. Ninety-two percent of HCP would agree to FP again. CONCLUSIONS: ENA guidelines include an appropriate screening tool for FP. With the support of a family facilitator, FP during procedures in the PICU is feasible and does not lead to interruptions in care. Family members believe they have a right to be present during procedures and HCP reported minimal or no effect on their practice with family present. Family presence is an effective way to promote patient- and family-centered care in the critical care setting.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T19:29:01Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-26en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T19:29:01Z-
dc.identifier.citation2009 National Teaching Institute Research Abstracts. American Journal of Critical Care, 18(3), e1-e17.en_GB
dc.conference.date2009en_GB
dc.conference.nameNational Teaching Institute and Critical Care Expositionen_GB
dc.conference.hostAmerican Association of Critical-Care Nursesen_GB
dc.conference.locationNew Orleans, Louisiana, USAen_GB
dc.identifier.citation2009 National Teaching Institute Research Abstracts. American Journal of Critical Care, 18(3), e1-e17.en_GB
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.