Critical care medicine · 2025
Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Family-Centered Care for Adult ICUs: 2024.
СтатьяКлинические рекомендацииНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hwang David Y, Oczkowski Simon J W, Lewis Kimberley, Birriel Barbara, Downar James, Farrier Christian E, Fiest Kirsten M, Gerritsen Rik T, Hart Joanna, Hartog Christiane S, Heras-La Calle Gabriel, Hope Aluko A, Jennerich Ann L, Kentish-Barnes Nancy, Kleinpell Ruth, Kross Erin K, Marshall Andrea P, Nydahl Peter, Peters Theodora, Rosa Regis G, Scruth Elizabeth, Sederstrom Nneka, Stollings Joanna L, Turnbull Alison E, Valley Thomas S, Netzer Giora, Aslakson Rebecca A, Hopkins Ramona O
Аннотация
RATIONALE: For staff in adult ICUs, providing family-centered care is an essential skill that affects important outcomes for both patients and families. The COVID-19 pandemic placed unprecedented strain on care of ICU families, and practices for family engagement and support are still adjusting.
OBJECTIVES: To review updated evidence for family support in adult ICUs, provide clear recommendations, and spotlight optimal family-centered care practices post-pandemic.
PANEL DESIGN: The multiprofessional guideline panel of 28 individuals, including family member partners, applied the processes described in the Society of Critical Care Medicine Standard Operating Procedures Manual to develop and publish evidence-based recommendations in alignment with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Conflict-of-interest policies were strictly followed in all phases of the guidelines, including panel selection, writing, and voting.
METHODS: The guidelines consist of four content sections: engagement of families, support of family needs, communication support, and support of ICU clinicians providing family-centered care. We conducted systematic reviews for 15 Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes questions, organized among these content sections, to identify the best available evidence. We summarized and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the GRADE evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or conditional, or as best practice statements where appropriate. The recommendations were approved using an online vote requiring greater than 80% agreement of voting panel members to pass.
RESULTS: Our panel issued 17 statements related to optimal family-centered care in adult ICUs, including one strong recommendation, 14 conditional recommendations, and two best practice statements. We reaffirmed the critical importance of liberalized family presence policies as default practice when possible and suggested options for family attendance on rounds and participation in bedside care. We suggested that ICUs provide support for families in the form of educational programs; ICU diaries; and mental health, bereavement, and spiritual support. We suggested the importance of providing structured communication for families and communication training for clinicians but did not recommend for or against any specific clinician-facing tools for family support or decision aids, based on current available evidence. We recommended that adult ICUs implement practices to systematically identify and reduce barriers to equitable critical care delivery for families and suggested that programs designed to support the wellbeing of clinicians responsible for family support be developed.
CONCLUSIONS: Our guideline panel achieved consensus regarding recommendations and best practices for family-centered care in adult ICUs.
OBJECTIVES: To review updated evidence for family support in adult ICUs, provide clear recommendations, and spotlight optimal family-centered care practices post-pandemic.
PANEL DESIGN: The multiprofessional guideline panel of 28 individuals, including family member partners, applied the processes described in the Society of Critical Care Medicine Standard Operating Procedures Manual to develop and publish evidence-based recommendations in alignment with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Conflict-of-interest policies were strictly followed in all phases of the guidelines, including panel selection, writing, and voting.
METHODS: The guidelines consist of four content sections: engagement of families, support of family needs, communication support, and support of ICU clinicians providing family-centered care. We conducted systematic reviews for 15 Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes questions, organized among these content sections, to identify the best available evidence. We summarized and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the GRADE evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or conditional, or as best practice statements where appropriate. The recommendations were approved using an online vote requiring greater than 80% agreement of voting panel members to pass.
RESULTS: Our panel issued 17 statements related to optimal family-centered care in adult ICUs, including one strong recommendation, 14 conditional recommendations, and two best practice statements. We reaffirmed the critical importance of liberalized family presence policies as default practice when possible and suggested options for family attendance on rounds and participation in bedside care. We suggested that ICUs provide support for families in the form of educational programs; ICU diaries; and mental health, bereavement, and spiritual support. We suggested the importance of providing structured communication for families and communication training for clinicians but did not recommend for or against any specific clinician-facing tools for family support or decision aids, based on current available evidence. We recommended that adult ICUs implement practices to systematically identify and reduce barriers to equitable critical care delivery for families and suggested that programs designed to support the wellbeing of clinicians responsible for family support be developed.
CONCLUSIONS: Our guideline panel achieved consensus regarding recommendations and best practices for family-centered care in adult ICUs.