OPEN REGIME OF INTENSIVE CARE UNITS PATIENT VISITS: EXPERTS OPINION

IF 0.2 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY
О. V. Yemyashev, I. Malysh, S. Dubrov, L. Zgrzheblovska, O. Loskutov, O. Havrylenko
{"title":"OPEN REGIME OF INTENSIVE CARE UNITS PATIENT VISITS: EXPERTS OPINION","authors":"О. V. Yemyashev, I. Malysh, S. Dubrov, L. Zgrzheblovska, O. Loskutov, O. Havrylenko","doi":"10.25284/2519-2078.2(95).2021.238331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Resume. The issue of open visits to intensive care units is currently a topical, acute and ambiguous issue. In Ukraine, it is actively discussed in the media, social networks, the medical community. Appropriate working groups of the Ministry of Health are being set up to optimize the regulatory framework on this issue.The article reviews the literature on the problems of open visits of adult patients undergoing treatment in the intensive care unit. Opinions on this issue are quite contradictory. On the one hand, there is a position that the stay of relatives in the ICU 24/7 improves the results of treatment, creating a more comfortable psychological atmosphere for the patient. On the other hand, and this approach prevails, a number of studies indicate an increase in the number of bacterial complications in patients with unlimited visits, complication of working conditions of medical staff, which leads to a deterioration in treatment outcomes in general.Public organization «Association of Anesthesiologists of Ukraine» conducted an online survey among anesthesiologists - members of the association for find out the opinion of Ukrainian experts about open visits to ICU’s patients. Most of the anesthesiologists surveyed are inclined to a limited visitation regime.","PeriodicalId":7735,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia, Pain & Intensive Care","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia, Pain & Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25284/2519-2078.2(95).2021.238331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Resume. The issue of open visits to intensive care units is currently a topical, acute and ambiguous issue. In Ukraine, it is actively discussed in the media, social networks, the medical community. Appropriate working groups of the Ministry of Health are being set up to optimize the regulatory framework on this issue.The article reviews the literature on the problems of open visits of adult patients undergoing treatment in the intensive care unit. Opinions on this issue are quite contradictory. On the one hand, there is a position that the stay of relatives in the ICU 24/7 improves the results of treatment, creating a more comfortable psychological atmosphere for the patient. On the other hand, and this approach prevails, a number of studies indicate an increase in the number of bacterial complications in patients with unlimited visits, complication of working conditions of medical staff, which leads to a deterioration in treatment outcomes in general.Public organization «Association of Anesthesiologists of Ukraine» conducted an online survey among anesthesiologists - members of the association for find out the opinion of Ukrainian experts about open visits to ICU’s patients. Most of the anesthesiologists surveyed are inclined to a limited visitation regime.
重症监护病房病人访问的开放制度:专家意见
重新开始重症监护病房的开放访问问题目前是一个热门的,尖锐的和模糊的问题。在乌克兰,媒体、社交网络和医学界都在积极讨论这一问题。正在设立卫生部的适当工作组,以优化这一问题的管理框架。本文回顾了有关在重症监护病房接受治疗的成人患者的开放访问问题的文献。对这个问题的看法是相当矛盾的。一方面,有观点认为亲属24/7待在ICU可以提高治疗效果,为患者创造更舒适的心理氛围。另一方面,在这种做法盛行的情况下,一些研究表明,无限制就诊的病人的细菌并发症数量增加,医务人员的工作条件复杂化,导致总体治疗效果恶化。公共组织“乌克兰麻醉师协会”在麻醉师-协会成员中进行了一项在线调查,以了解乌克兰专家对ICU患者开放访问的意见。大多数接受调查的麻醉师倾向于有限的探视制度。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
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