Is it beneficial to allow the patient's family to attend cardiac resuscitation: Different cultural perspectives? A scoping review

Hasan Abualruz , Mohammad A. Abu Sabra , Elham H. Othman , Malakeh Z. Malak , Saleh Al Omar , Reema R. Safadi , Salah M. AbuRuz , Khaled Suleiman
{"title":"Is it beneficial to allow the patient's family to attend cardiac resuscitation: Different cultural perspectives? A scoping review","authors":"Hasan Abualruz ,&nbsp;Mohammad A. Abu Sabra ,&nbsp;Elham H. Othman ,&nbsp;Malakeh Z. Malak ,&nbsp;Saleh Al Omar ,&nbsp;Reema R. Safadi ,&nbsp;Salah M. AbuRuz ,&nbsp;Khaled Suleiman","doi":"10.1016/j.jointm.2024.11.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) is a controversial issue that remains unresolved in contemporary practice. Although there are many research studies on FPDR and several published statements and guidelines supporting FPDR by international organizations, no conclusive position guides clinicians in making a decision. A scoping review was conducted to discuss the different healthcare professionals (HCPs) and cultural perspectives toward family presence during CPR is conducted.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, we screened 797 studies published between 2000 and 2022 from the databases including Springer Link, MEDLINE, Pro-Quest Central, CINAHL Plus, and Google Scholar. All articles were filtered using inclusion criteria to eliminate redundant, irrelevant, and unnecessary content.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 34 studies that fulfill the eligibility criteria reported that there are multiple perspectives from HCPs and families about FPDR. HCPs felt that their performance had improved during resuscitation and received family support in breaking the bad news of death. Family relatives who attended cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) had less stress, less anxiety, more positive grieving behavior, and enhanced family members’ decision-making. Contrastingly, some HCPs were against FPDR because they were concerned about the family's misinterpretation of resuscitation activities, psychological trauma to the family members, increased stress levels among staff, and worry about an unexpected response from the distressed family.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>It is important to consider the culture and awareness of families when deciding on FPDR. It is the responsibility of HCPs to assess family members’ willingness and the benefits they attain from attending CPR. The decision should be based on the given situation, cultural context and beliefs, and current policy to guide practice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73799,"journal":{"name":"Journal of intensive medicine","volume":"5 2","pages":"Pages 202-210"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of intensive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667100X24001245","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) is a controversial issue that remains unresolved in contemporary practice. Although there are many research studies on FPDR and several published statements and guidelines supporting FPDR by international organizations, no conclusive position guides clinicians in making a decision. A scoping review was conducted to discuss the different healthcare professionals (HCPs) and cultural perspectives toward family presence during CPR is conducted.

Methods

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, we screened 797 studies published between 2000 and 2022 from the databases including Springer Link, MEDLINE, Pro-Quest Central, CINAHL Plus, and Google Scholar. All articles were filtered using inclusion criteria to eliminate redundant, irrelevant, and unnecessary content.

Results

A total of 34 studies that fulfill the eligibility criteria reported that there are multiple perspectives from HCPs and families about FPDR. HCPs felt that their performance had improved during resuscitation and received family support in breaking the bad news of death. Family relatives who attended cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) had less stress, less anxiety, more positive grieving behavior, and enhanced family members’ decision-making. Contrastingly, some HCPs were against FPDR because they were concerned about the family's misinterpretation of resuscitation activities, psychological trauma to the family members, increased stress levels among staff, and worry about an unexpected response from the distressed family.

Conclusions

It is important to consider the culture and awareness of families when deciding on FPDR. It is the responsibility of HCPs to assess family members’ willingness and the benefits they attain from attending CPR. The decision should be based on the given situation, cultural context and beliefs, and current policy to guide practice.
允许患者家属参加心脏复苏是否有益:不同的文化视角?范围审查
家庭在复苏中的存在(FPDR)是一个有争议的问题,在当代实践中仍未得到解决。尽管有许多关于FPDR的研究和一些国际组织发表的支持FPDR的声明和指南,但没有结论性的立场指导临床医生做出决定。进行了一项范围审查,以讨论不同的医疗保健专业人员(HCPs)和文化观点,在心肺复苏术期间的家庭存在。方法采用系统评价首选报告项目和荟萃分析扩展范围评价(PRISMA-ScR)指南,从施普林格Link、MEDLINE、Pro-Quest Central、CINAHL Plus和谷歌Scholar等数据库中筛选2000年至2022年发表的797项研究。使用纳入标准对所有文章进行筛选,以消除冗余、不相关和不必要的内容。结果共有34项符合资格标准的研究报告了来自医护人员和家庭对FPDR的多种观点。医护人员认为他们在复苏期间的表现有所改善,在宣布死亡的坏消息时得到了家人的支持。接受心肺复苏术(CPR)的家属压力更小,焦虑更少,更积极的悲伤行为,并提高了家庭成员的决策能力。相反,一些医护人员反对FPDR,因为他们担心家庭对复苏活动的误解,对家庭成员的心理创伤,工作人员的压力水平增加,以及担心痛苦家庭的意外反应。结论在决定是否采用FPDR时,应考虑家庭的文化和意识。医务人员有责任评估家庭成员参加心肺复苏术的意愿和益处。这一决定应该基于特定的情况、文化背景和信仰,以及当前的政策来指导实践。
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
Journal of intensive medicine
Journal of intensive medicine Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
58 days
×
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