OBJECTIVE: The objective was to consider family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) from the perspective of the family member. BACKGROUND: FPDR has been a topic of interest internationally since the first report of this practice more than 25 years ago. Worldwide, many studies have provided insight into the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCPs); however, there is limited research on the perspective and experiences of family members. DESIGN: An integrative review was conducted. An electronic database search was conducted for the years from 1994-2017. METHODS: The Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PyschINFO, Academic Search, SocINDEX, PubMed, ProQuest databases and Google Scholar were searched. Search terms were family perceptions, family presence and resuscitation. RESULTS: Twelve reviews met inclusion criteria. Findings suggest that family members view family presence as a fundamental right. Family members involved in a FPDR experience reported that their presence benefitted the patient and healthcare team. In an international sample of studies, family presence overall was viewed positively by family members and they voiced wanting to be given an option to be present during a loved one's resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support that family members' desire for FPDR; however, the literature reflects that HCPs do not always embrace the practice of FPDR. Stronger educational preparation of nurses and other HCPs related to FPDR is warranted. Policy initiatives include the formulation of policies that allow family presence during resuscitation of a family member. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The findings are relevant for a clinical practice that promotes a more family-centred approach to allowing FPDR. Creating policy and providing FPDR education for HCPs based on evidence provide more consistency in clinical practice and help to eliminate the moral distress experienced by clinical nurses forced to make difficult decisions during a stressful event.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to consider family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) from the perspective of the family member. BACKGROUND: FPDR has been a topic of interest internationally since the first report of this practice more than 25 years ago. Worldwide, many studies have provided insight into the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCPs); however, there is limited research on the perspective and experiences of family members. DESIGN: An integrative review was conducted. An electronic database search was conducted for the years from 1994-2017. METHODS: The Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PyschINFO, Academic Search, SocINDEX, PubMed, ProQuest databases and Google Scholar were searched. Search terms were family perceptions, family presence and resuscitation. RESULTS: Twelve reviews met inclusion criteria. Findings suggest that family members view family presence as a fundamental right. Family members involved in a FPDR experience reported that their presence benefitted the patient and healthcare team. In an international sample of studies, family presence overall was viewed positively by family members and they voiced wanting to be given an option to be present during a loved one's resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support that family members' desire for FPDR; however, the literature reflects that HCPs do not always embrace the practice of FPDR. Stronger educational preparation of nurses and other HCPs related to FPDR is warranted. Policy initiatives include the formulation of policies that allow family presence during resuscitation of a family member. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The findings are relevant for a clinical practice that promotes a more family-centred approach to allowing FPDR. Creating policy and providing FPDR education for HCPs based on evidence provide more consistency in clinical practice and help to eliminate the moral distress experienced by clinical nurses forced to make difficult decisions during a stressful event.
Authors: Timur Sellmann; Andrea Oendorf; Dietmar Wetzchewald; Heidrun Schwager; Serge Christian Thal; Stephan Marsch Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-06-02 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Spyros D Mentzelopoulos; Keith Couper; Patrick Van de Voorde; Patrick Druwé; Marieke Blom; Gavin D Perkins; Ileana Lulic; Jana Djakow; Violetta Raffay; Gisela Lilja; Leo Bossaert Journal: Notf Rett Med Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 0.826