An integrative literature review examining the key elements of bereavement follow-up interventions in critical care.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Aileen H Labram, Bridget Johnston, Margaret McGuire
{"title":"An integrative literature review examining the key elements of bereavement follow-up interventions in critical care.","authors":"Aileen H Labram,&nbsp;Bridget Johnston,&nbsp;Margaret McGuire","doi":"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>The aim of this review is to examine bereavement follow-up intervention studies in critical care, with the purpose of integrating results on the timing, content, aims and outcomes of interventions. The impact of a death in critical care is well documented, and bereavement follow-up is recognised as an important topic, but there is limited research with little consensus on the content and structure of interventions.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A total of 18 papers were selected; 11 are intervention studies, with only one randomised control trial. Six papers were from national surveys and are not the focus of this review. Bereavement follow-up mainly consisted of information giving, condolence interventions, telephone calls and meetings with families. The timing, content, aims and outcomes depended on the intervention and were influenced by the design of the study.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Overall, bereavement follow-up is acceptable for relatives but outcomes are mixed. Calls for more research are valid, but how do we utilise the current research to better inform the critical care community? Researchers suggest that bereavement follow-up interventions need to be designed with specific aims and outcomes, in collaboration with bereaved families that are appropriate to the intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":48837,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","volume":"17 3","pages":"193-207"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ef/09/spc-17-193.PMC10371062.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000666","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: The aim of this review is to examine bereavement follow-up intervention studies in critical care, with the purpose of integrating results on the timing, content, aims and outcomes of interventions. The impact of a death in critical care is well documented, and bereavement follow-up is recognised as an important topic, but there is limited research with little consensus on the content and structure of interventions.

Recent findings: A total of 18 papers were selected; 11 are intervention studies, with only one randomised control trial. Six papers were from national surveys and are not the focus of this review. Bereavement follow-up mainly consisted of information giving, condolence interventions, telephone calls and meetings with families. The timing, content, aims and outcomes depended on the intervention and were influenced by the design of the study.

Summary: Overall, bereavement follow-up is acceptable for relatives but outcomes are mixed. Calls for more research are valid, but how do we utilise the current research to better inform the critical care community? Researchers suggest that bereavement follow-up interventions need to be designed with specific aims and outcomes, in collaboration with bereaved families that are appropriate to the intervention.

Abstract Image

一篇综合文献综述,探讨重症监护中丧亲随访干预的关键要素。
综述目的:本综述的目的是回顾重症监护中丧亲随访干预的研究,目的是整合干预的时间、内容、目的和结果。死亡对重症监护的影响有很好的记录,丧亲随访被认为是一个重要的主题,但研究有限,对干预措施的内容和结构几乎没有共识。近期发现:共入选论文18篇;11项是干预研究,只有一项随机对照试验。六篇论文来自全国调查,不是本综述的重点。丧亲随访主要包括提供信息、慰问干预、电话和与家属会面。时间、内容、目标和结果取决于干预措施,并受研究设计的影响。总结:总体而言,丧亲随访对亲属是可以接受的,但结果好坏参半。对更多研究的呼吁是有效的,但我们如何利用当前的研究来更好地告知重症监护社区?研究人员建议,丧亲后续干预措施需要与适合干预措施的丧亲家庭合作,设计具有特定目标和结果的干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: A reader-friendly resource, Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care provides an up-to-date account of the most important advances in the field of supportive and palliative care. Each issue contains either two or three sections delivering a diverse and comprehensive coverage of all the key issues, including end-of-life management, gastrointestinal systems and respiratory problems. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care is an indispensable journal for the busy clinician, researcher or student.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信