当前位置: X-MOL 学术Crit. Care › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Restricted visitation policies in acute care settings during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review
Critical Care ( IF 15.1 ) Pub Date : 2021-09-25 , DOI: 10.1186/s13054-021-03763-7
Stephana J Moss 1 , Karla D Krewulak 1 , Henry T Stelfox 1 , Sofia B Ahmed 2 , Melanie C Anglin 1 , Sean M Bagshaw 3 , Karen E A Burns 4 , Deborah J Cook 5 , Christopher J Doig 1 , Alison Fox-Robichaud 5 , Robert Fowler 6 , Laura Hernández 1 , Michelle E Kho 7 , Maia Kredentser 8 , Kira Makuk 1 , Srinivas Murthy 9 , Daniel J Niven 1 , Kendiss Olafson 10 , Ken Kuljit S Parhar 1 , Scott B Patten 11 , Oleksa G Rewa 12 , Bram Rochwerg 5 , Bonnie Sept 1 , Andrea Soo 13 , Krista Spence 1 , Sean Spence 14 , Sharon Straus 6 , Andrew West 15 , Jeanna Parsons Leigh 16 , Kirsten M Fiest 1
Affiliation  

Restricted visitation policies in acute care settings because of the COVID-19 pandemic have negative consequences. The objective of this scoping review is to identify impacts of restricted visitation policies in acute care settings, and describe perspectives and mitigation approaches among patients, families, and healthcare professionals. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Healthstar, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on January 01/2021, unrestricted, for published primary research records reporting any study design. We included secondary (e.g., reviews) and non-research records (e.g., commentaries), and performed manual searches in web-based resources. We excluded records that did not report primary data. Two reviewers independently abstracted data in duplicate. Of 7810 citations, we included 155 records. Sixty-six records (43%) were primary research; 29 (44%) case reports or case series, and 26 (39%) cohort studies; 21 (14%) were literature reviews and 8 (5%) were expert recommendations; 54 (35%) were commentary, editorial, or opinion pieces. Restricted visitation policies impacted coping and daily function (n = 31, 20%) and mental health outcomes (n = 29, 19%) of patients, families, and healthcare professionals. Participants described a need for coping and support (n = 107, 69%), connection and communication (n = 107, 69%), and awareness of state of well-being (n = 101, 65%). Eighty-seven approaches to mitigate impact of restricted visitation were identified, targeting families (n = 61, 70%), patients (n = 51, 59%), and healthcare professionals (n = 40, 46%). Patients, families, and healthcare professionals were impacted by restricted visitation polices in acute care settings during COVID-19. The consequences of this approach on patients and families are understudied and warrant evaluation of approaches to mitigate their impact. Future pandemic policy development should include the perspectives of patients, families, and healthcare professionals. Trial registration: The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020221662) and a protocol peer-reviewed prior to data extraction.

中文翻译:

COVID-19 大流行期间急性护理环境中的限制探视政策:范围审查

由于 COVID-19 大流行,急性护理环境中的限制探视政策会产生负面影响。本范围审查的目的是确定限制探视政策在急性护理环境中的影响,并描述患者、家庭和医疗保健专业人员的观点和缓解方法。我们于 2021 年 1 月 1 日不受限制地检索了 Medline、Embase、PsycINFO、Healthstar、CINAHL、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,以获取报告任何研究设计的已发表主要研究记录。我们纳入了次要(例如,评论)和非研究记录(例如,评论),并在基于网络的资源中进行了手动搜索。我们排除了未报告主要数据的记录。两名审稿人独立提取数据一式两份。在 7810 次引文中,我们包含了 155 条记录。66 条记录 (43%) 是主要研究;29 (44%) 份病例报告或病例系列,以及 26 (39%) 份队列研究;21篇(14%)是文献综述,8篇(5%)是专家推荐;54 (35%) 篇是评论、社论或观点文章。限制探视政策影响了患者、家庭和医疗保健专业人员的应对和日常功能 (n = 31, 20%) 和心理健康结果 (n = 29, 19%)。参与者描述了对应对和支持(n = 107, 69%)、联系和沟通(n = 107, 69%)以及幸福状态意识(n = 101, 65%)的需求。确定了 87 种减轻限制探视影响的方法,针对家庭 (n = 61, 70%)、患者 (n = 51, 59%) 和医疗保健专业人员 (n = 40, 46%)。患者、家属、和医疗保健专业人员在 COVID-19 期间受到急性护理环境中限制探视政策的影响。这种方法对患者和家属的影响尚未得到充分研究,因此需要评估减轻其影响的方法。未来的大流行政策制定应包括患者、家庭和医疗保健专业人员的观点。试验注册:该评论在 PROSPERO (CRD42020221662) 上注册,并且在数据提取之前进行了同行评审。
更新日期:2021-09-28
down
wechat
bug