MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220893953 · doi:10.1111/jan.15212

Barriers to and facilitators for supporting patient communication in the adult <scp>ICU</scp> during the <scp>COVID</scp> ‐19 pandemic: A qualitative study

2022· article· en· W4220893953 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura Istanboulian, Louise Rose, Yana Yunusova, Craig Dale

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of TorontoToronto East General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Rehabilitation Institute
FundersCanadian Nurses Foundation
KeywordsPersonal protective equipmentMedicinePandemicQualitative researchNursingIntensive care unitIsolation (microbiology)Health careMedical emergencyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Intensive care medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim To explore barriers to and facilitators for supporting communication with and for patients treated with invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Design A qualitative descriptive study reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research. Methods Adult intensive care unit patients treated with an advanced airway for mechanical ventilation, their family members and healthcare providers (nurses, intensivists and allied health) were recruited for interviews between January and April 2021. Interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis methods. Reported communication barriers and facilitators were mapped to the theoretical framework of acceptability to identify potentially modifiable clinical and institutional practices. Results We recruited 29 participants (20 healthcare providers, four patients and five family member). Provider communication barriers included isolation procedures, lack of personal protective equipment and inadequate communication tools/training, which reduced perceived communication frequency and effectiveness. Patients and families reported infrequent proactive provision of communication tools, which contributed to a crisis of unmet needs. Reported facilitators included adequate access to personal protective equipment to mitigate the risk of patient proximity and communication tools/training to improve communication effectiveness. Authentic unit leadership helped to assuage pandemic work stressors and encourage humanistic care. Our analysis indicates low acceptability of existing communication practices during the COVID‐19 pandemic and the importance of leadership to reduce the burden of communication through provision of key necessary resources. Conclusion COVID‐19 conditions have precipitated a communication crisis in the ICU. The results of this study have practice and policy implications and will be used to co‐design a communication intervention for use during and beyond the COVID‐19 pandemic. Impact The study contributes a better understanding of resources necessary to support patient communication. Results apply beyond the pandemic to routine use of infection prevention and control precautions in the intensive care unit.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207