INTRODUCTION: No research exists evaluating family presence (FP) during resuscitation interventions (RIs) and invasive procedures (IPs) using ENA guidelines in a pediatric emergency department. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of an FP protocol in facilitating uninterrupted care and describe parents' and providers' experiences. METHODS: FP was offered by a family facilitator to parents of children undergoing RIs or IPs. Data were collected during 64 FP events (28 RIs and 36 IPs). Following the event, 92 providers and 22 parents completed a survey about their experiences. RESULTS: In 100% of FP cases, patient care was uninterrupted. Parents were positive about FP, believed it helped their child, and reported that it eased their fears. All parents described an active role during the event, and most believed they had a right to be present. Three months later, no parents reported traumatic memories. Providers also were positive about FP and reported that the presence of parents did not negatively affect care. Although most (70%) supported FP during RIs, more nurses (92%) and physicians (78%) supported it than did residents (35%, P < .05). DISCUSSION: The findings suggest the effectiveness of a pediatric emergency department FP protocol in facilitating uninterrupted patient care. The benefits identified for parents support implementation of FP programs.
INTRODUCTION: No research exists evaluating family presence (FP) during resuscitation interventions (RIs) and invasive procedures (IPs) using ENA guidelines in a pediatric emergency department. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of an FP protocol in facilitating uninterrupted care and describe parents' and providers' experiences. METHODS: FP was offered by a family facilitator to parents of children undergoing RIs or IPs. Data were collected during 64 FP events (28 RIs and 36 IPs). Following the event, 92 providers and 22 parents completed a survey about their experiences. RESULTS: In 100% of FP cases, patient care was uninterrupted. Parents were positive about FP, believed it helped their child, and reported that it eased their fears. All parents described an active role during the event, and most believed they had a right to be present. Three months later, no parents reported traumatic memories. Providers also were positive about FP and reported that the presence of parents did not negatively affect care. Although most (70%) supported FP during RIs, more nurses (92%) and physicians (78%) supported it than did residents (35%, P < .05). DISCUSSION: The findings suggest the effectiveness of a pediatric emergency department FP protocol in facilitating uninterrupted patient care. The benefits identified for parents support implementation of FP programs.
Authors: Monica E Kleinman; Allan R de Caen; Leon Chameides; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Marc D Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Ashraf H Coovadia; Mary Fran Hazinski; Robert W Hickey; Vinay M Nadkarni; Amelia G Reis; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; James Tibballs; Arno L Zaritsky; David Zideman Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Monica E Kleinman; Allan R de Caen; Leon Chameides; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Marc D Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Ashraf H Coovadia; Mary Fran Hazinski; Robert W Hickey; Vinay M Nadkarni; Amelia G Reis; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; James Tibballs; Arno L Zaritsky; David Zideman Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2010-10-18 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Cristiana Araújo G Ferreira; Flávia Simphronio Balbino; Maria Magda F G Balieiro; Myriam Aparecida Mandetta Journal: Rev Paul Pediatr Date: 2014-03
Authors: Peter Hodkinson; Jessica Price; Caroline Croxson; Lee Wallis; Alison Ward; Andrew Argent; Stephen Reid Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 3.240