OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of satisfaction of family members with the care that they and their critically ill relative received. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Six university-affiliated intensive care units across Canada. METHODS: We administered a validated questionnaire to family members who made at least one visit to intensive care unit patients who received mechanical ventilation for >48 hrs. We obtained self-rated levels of satisfaction with 25 key aspects of care related to the overall intensive care unit experience, communication, and decision making. For family members of survivors, the questionnaire was administered while the patient was still in the hospital. For family members of nonsurvivors, the questionnaire was mailed out to the family member 3-4 wks after the patient's death. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 891 family members received questionnaires; 624 were returned (70% response rate). The majority of respondents were satisfied with overall care and with overall decision making (mean +/- sd item score, 84.3 +/- 15.7 and 75.9 +/- 26.4, respectively). Families reported the greatest satisfaction with nursing skill and competence (92.4 +/- 14.0), the compassion and respect given to the patient (91.8 +/- 15.4), and pain management (89.1 +/- 16.7). They were least satisfied with the waiting room atmosphere (65.0 +/- 30.6) and frequency of physician communication (70.7 +/- 29.0). The variables significantly associated with overall satisfaction in a regression analysis were completeness of information received, respect and compassion shown to the patient and family member, and the amount of health care received. Satisfaction varied significantly across sites. CONCLUSIONS: Most family members were highly satisfied with the care provided to them and their critically ill relative in the intensive care unit. Efforts to improve the nature of interactions and communication with families are likely to lead to improvements in satisfaction.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of satisfaction of family members with the care that they and their critically ill relative received. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Six university-affiliated intensive care units across Canada. METHODS: We administered a validated questionnaire to family members who made at least one visit to intensive care unit patients who received mechanical ventilation for >48 hrs. We obtained self-rated levels of satisfaction with 25 key aspects of care related to the overall intensive care unit experience, communication, and decision making. For family members of survivors, the questionnaire was administered while the patient was still in the hospital. For family members of nonsurvivors, the questionnaire was mailed out to the family member 3-4 wks after the patient's death. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 891 family members received questionnaires; 624 were returned (70% response rate). The majority of respondents were satisfied with overall care and with overall decision making (mean +/- sd item score, 84.3 +/- 15.7 and 75.9 +/- 26.4, respectively). Families reported the greatest satisfaction with nursing skill and competence (92.4 +/- 14.0), the compassion and respect given to the patient (91.8 +/- 15.4), and pain management (89.1 +/- 16.7). They were least satisfied with the waiting room atmosphere (65.0 +/- 30.6) and frequency of physician communication (70.7 +/- 29.0). The variables significantly associated with overall satisfaction in a regression analysis were completeness of information received, respect and compassion shown to the patient and family member, and the amount of health care received. Satisfaction varied significantly across sites. CONCLUSIONS: Most family members were highly satisfied with the care provided to them and their critically ill relative in the intensive care unit. Efforts to improve the nature of interactions and communication with families are likely to lead to improvements in satisfaction.
Authors: Tristan R Osborn; J Randall Curtis; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Anthony L Back; Sarah E Shannon; Ruth A Engelberg Journal: Chest Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: J Randall Curtis; Paul S Ciechanowski; Lois Downey; Julia Gold; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Sarah E Shannon; Patsy D Treece; Jessica P Young; Ruth A Engelberg Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2012-07-06 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Lawrence A Ho; Ruth A Engelberg; J Randall Curtis; Judith Nelson; John Luce; Daniel E Ray; Mitchell M Levy Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Judith E Nelson; Alice F Mercado; Sharon L Camhi; Nidhi Tandon; Sylvan Wallenstein; Gary I August; R Sean Morrison Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2007-12-10
Authors: J Randall Curtis; Patsy D Treece; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Lois Downey; Sarah E Shannon; Theresa Braungardt; Darrell Owens; Kenneth P Steinberg; Ruth A Engelberg Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2008-05-14 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: K E A Burns; L Rizvi; O M Smith; Y Lee; J Lee; M Wang; M Brown; M Parker; A Premji; D Leung; M Hammond Mobilio; L Gotlib-Conn; R Nisenbaum; M Santos; Y Li; S Mehta Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-12-10 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: David Y Hwang; Daniel Yagoda; Hilary M Perrey; Tara M Tehan; Mary Guanci; Lillian Ananian; Paul F Currier; J Perren Cobb; Jonathan Rosand Journal: J Neurosci Nurs Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 1.230