In-person, virtual visiting and telephone calls in Australia and New Zealand intensive care units: A point prevalence multicentre study mapping daytime and nighttime interactions
Alexis Tabah,Mahesh Ramanan,Kevin B. Laupland,Kimberley Haines,Naomi Hammond,Serena Knowles,Kylie Jacobs,Stuart Baker,Edward Litton
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aucc.2024.101144
IF: 3.265
2024-12-06
Australian Critical Care
Abstract:Background Family presence, in-person and via virtual visiting (video calls) and the telephone, is an integral part of patient- and family-centred critical care. Previous studies focussed on visiting policies and their effects. Data mapping the frequency and timing of these interactions are not available. Objectives The aims of this study were to describe the prevalence of in-person visiting and the use of telephone or video conferencing in Australia and New Zealand intensive care units (ICUs). Design A point prevalence survey was conducted to map visiting policies, hourly family presence at the bedside, telephone or video calls, and reasons for each interaction. Setting The research was conducted in a 24-h study period in October 2020, corresponding to the end of the 2nd COVID-19 pandemic wave in 40 Australia and New Zealand ICUs. Measurements and main results At the time of survey, 77% of ICUs had restrictions to visiting, median (interquartile range [IQR]) time of 9 (2; 24) hours with permitted visiting per day, a mean of 8 hours less than before the COVID-19 pandemic. There were 532 patients, a median (IQR) of 13 (6; 25) patients per ICU. Two patients had COVID-19. Over 24 h, 65% of patients had at least one in-person visit, median (IQR) of 1 (0; 3) hours with visitors. Telephone calls were received for 52% patients, median (IQR) of 1 (0; 2) calls. Video calls were received for 6% of the patients. In-person visits peaked between 10:00 and 12:00, with a second smaller peak between 16:00 and 17:00. Visiting continued through the evening, and 2% of the patients had visitors overnight. Telephone calls peaked at 10:00, continued through the day and evening, with few calls received overnight. In-person visits were predominantly motivated by family interactions (81%) and telephone calls by clinical updates (51%) and family interactions (47%). Conclusions In a low COVID-19 prevalence period, Australia and New Zealand ICUs had partially reopened to visitors. Most visits happened during the day and evening but persisted overnight. ICU resourcing and visiting policies should take these data into account to facilitate family presence at the bedside, virtual visiting, and obtaining clinical updates via telephone.
nursing,critical care medicine