Nurses and physicians work side-by-side in the intensive care unit (ICU). Effective exchanges of patient information are essential to safe patient care in the ICU. Nurses often rate nurse-physician communication lower than physicians and report that it is difficult to speak up, that disagreements are not resolved and that their input is not well received.Therefore, this study explored nurses’ dialogue with physicians regarding patients’ clinical status and the prerequisites for effective and accurate exchanges of information.We adopted a qualitative approach, conducting three focus group discussions with five to six nurses and physicians each (14 total).Two themes emerged. The first theme highlighted nurses’ contributions to dialogues with physicians; nurses’ ongoing observations of patients were essential to patient care discussions. The second theme addressed the prerequisites of accurate and effective dialogue regarding care options, comprising three subthemes: nurses’ ability to speak up and present clinical changes, establishment of shared goal and clinical understanding, and open dialogue and willingness to listen to each other.Nurses should understand their essential role in conducting ongoing observations of patients and their right to be included in care-related decision-making processes. Physicians should be willing to listen to and include nurses’ clinical observations and concerns.

Clinical practice should develop routines that enable nurses to be present at the bedside and to work in a concentrated and systematic manner. Furthermore, providing safe care requires nurses to be sensitive and attentive to each patient's unique situation.

Significant scientific and technological advances in intensive care have been made. However, patients in the intensive care unit may experience discomfort, loss of control, and surreal experiences. This has generated relevant debates about how to humanize the intensive care units and whether humanization is necessary at all. This paper aimed to explore how humanizing intensive care is described in the literature. A scoping review was performed. Studies published between 01.01.1999 and 02.03.2020 were identified in the CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus databases. After removing 185 duplicates, 363 papers were screened by title and abstract. Full-text screening of 116 papers led to the inclusion of 68 papers in the review based on the inclusion criteria; these papers mentioned humanizing or dehumanizing intensive care in the title or abstract. Humanizing care was defined as holistic care, as a general attitude of professionals toward patients and relatives and an organizational ideal encompassing all subjects of the healthcare system. Technology was considered an integral component of intensive care that must be balanced with caring for the patient as a whole and autonomous person. This holistic view of patients and relatives could ameliorate the negative effects of technology. There were geographical differences and the large number of studies from Spain and Brazil reflect the growing interest in humanizing intensive care in these particular countries. In conclusion, a more holistic approach with a greater emphasis on the individual patient, relatives, and social context is the foundation for humanizing intensive care, as reflected in the attitudes of nurses and other healthcare professionals. Demands for mastering technology may dominate nurses’ attention toward patients and relatives; therefore, humanized intensive care requires a holistic attitude from health professionals and organizations toward patients and relatives. Healthcare organizations, society, and regulatory frameworks demanding humanized intensive care may enforce humanized intensive care.

No abstract