BACKGROUND: Family witnessed resuscitation is the practice of enabling patients' family members to be present during resuscitation. Research is inconsistent as to the effectiveness or usefulness of this initiative. AIM: To evaluate the performance of two scales that assess perceptions of family witnessed resuscitation among a sample of health professionals, in an Australian non-teaching hospital, and explore differences in perceptions according to sociodemographic characteristics and previous experience. DESIGN: Descriptive, replication study, using a cross-sectional survey. METHOD: An anonymous survey was distributed to 221 emergency department clinicians. Sociodemographic characteristics and perceptions of family witnessed resuscitation using the Family Presence Risk-Benefit and Family Presence Self-confidence Scales were assessed. Exploratory factor analysis was used to evaluate the performance of the scales. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen doctors and nurses returned the survey (response rate of 51.6%). Both Scales were found to have a single factor structure and a high level of internal consistency. Approximately two-thirds of participants considered that family presence was a right of patients and families, and almost a quarter of respondents had invited family presence during resuscitation on more than five occasions. We found no significant differences in scale scores between doctors and nurses. CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the validity of the Family Presence Risk-Benefit and Family Presence Self-Confidence Scales in the Australian context, and highlight the need to support clinicians in the provision of family witnessed resuscitation to all families.
BACKGROUND: Family witnessed resuscitation is the practice of enabling patients' family members to be present during resuscitation. Research is inconsistent as to the effectiveness or usefulness of this initiative. AIM: To evaluate the performance of two scales that assess perceptions of family witnessed resuscitation among a sample of health professionals, in an Australian non-teaching hospital, and explore differences in perceptions according to sociodemographic characteristics and previous experience. DESIGN: Descriptive, replication study, using a cross-sectional survey. METHOD: An anonymous survey was distributed to 221 emergency department clinicians. Sociodemographic characteristics and perceptions of family witnessed resuscitation using the Family Presence Risk-Benefit and Family Presence Self-confidence Scales were assessed. Exploratory factor analysis was used to evaluate the performance of the scales. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen doctors and nurses returned the survey (response rate of 51.6%). Both Scales were found to have a single factor structure and a high level of internal consistency. Approximately two-thirds of participants considered that family presence was a right of patients and families, and almost a quarter of respondents had invited family presence during resuscitation on more than five occasions. We found no significant differences in scale scores between doctors and nurses. CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the validity of the Family Presence Risk-Benefit and Family Presence Self-Confidence Scales in the Australian context, and highlight the need to support clinicians in the provision of family witnessed resuscitation to all families.