Traumatic Stressors in the Intensive Care Unit: Iranian Patients’ and Nurses’ Viewpoints

Azizi-Fini, Ismail; Adib-Hajbaghery, Mohsen; Ahmadi, Roya; Fallahi, Fatemeh

doi:10.5812/traumamon.37631

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The median patient sample size was n = 76.5 (min: 16, max: 868, IQR 40.8-113.5). Moreover, 13 studies had also included HCPs [3,4,8,18,23,33,[35][36][37][38][39][40][41], with a median sample size of n = 55 in 14 HCPs samples (min: 21, max: 152, IQR 33.8-72.0). There were only four investigations that had included relatives.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ratios of men to women were 37 3), respectively. All of the 13 articles that had included HCPs provided data on professions of HCPs [3,4,8,18,23,33,[35][36][37][38][39][40][41]. In 10 out of 14 samples, the percentage of nurses (including nurse assistants) was 100% [3,4,18,33,35,[37][38][39][40][41].…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All of the 13 articles that had included HCPs provided data on professions of HCPs [3,4,8,18,23,33,[35][36][37][38][39][40][41]. In 10 out of 14 samples, the percentage of nurses (including nurse assistants) was 100% [3,4,18,33,35,[37][38][39][40][41]. The rates of nurses were 0% [33], 28.6% [33], 80.0% [8], and 85.0% [23] in the remaining four studies, resulting in a median percentage of nurses of 100% (min: 0, max: 100, IQR: 83.8-100).…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Perceived Severity of Stressors in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review and Semi-Quantitative Analysis of the Literature on the Perspectives of Patients, Health Care Providers and Relatives

Krampe

Denke

Gülden

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to synthesize quantitative research that identified ranking lists of the most severe stressors of patients in the intensive care unit, as perceived by patients, relatives, and health care professionals (HCP). We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library from 1989 to 15 May 2020. Data were analyzed with descriptive and semi-quantitative methods to yield summarizing ranking lists of the most severe stressors. We synthesized the results of 42 prospective cross-sectional observational studies from different international regions. All investigations had assessed patient ratings. Thirteen studies also measured HCP ratings, and four studies included ratings of relatives. Data indicated that patients rate the severity of stressors lower than HCPs and relatives do. Out of all ranking lists, we extracted 137 stressor items that were most frequently ranked among the most severe stressors. After allocation to four domains, a group of clinical ICU experts sorted these stressors with good to excellent agreement according to their stress levels. Our results may contribute to improve HCPs’ and relatives’ understanding of patients’ perceptions of stressors in the ICU. The synthesized stressor rankings can be used for the development of new assessment instruments of stressors.

show abstract

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perceived Severity of Stressors in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review and Semi-Quantitative Analysis of the Literature on the Perspectives of Patients, Health Care Providers and Relatives

Krampe

Denke

Gülden

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Environmental stressors include being in an unfamiliar environment and noise resulting from people and other factors in the environment . In general, these stressors include the presence of a tube in the mouth or nose, pain, inability to sleep and speak, thirst, fear of death, longing for family, urinary and faecal incontinence, and alarm sounds . Patients' experiences with stressors may negatively affect their recovery and return to normal life processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 In general, these stressors include the presence of a tube in the mouth or nose, pain, inability to sleep and speak, thirst, fear of death, longing for family, urinary and faecal incontinence, and alarm sounds. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Patients' experiences with stressors may negatively affect their recovery and return to normal life processes. The effect of stressors that patients are exposed to in ICUs and that are remembered later on may cause patients to have psychological problems such as anxiety, inability to concentrate, nightmares, difficulty sleeping, fear, and panic in their life after discharge.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between stressors and intensive care unit experiences

Zengin¹,

Ören²,

Ustundag

2019

Nursing in Critical Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) face many physical and psychological stressors because of the environment of these units and their own critical conditions and experience stress in various degrees. Each stressor may affect patients' experiences in ICUs differently. Aim and objectives This study aimed to examine the relationship between stressors and patients' experiences in an ICU. Methods This descriptive, cross‐sectional study was conducted between September 2014 and June 2015 in a university hospital and included 116 patients who were admitted to the general ICU for at least 24 hours. Data were collected using the Intensive Care Experience Scale and a questionnaire that included questions about socio‐demographic and disease‐related characteristics of patients and their stressors. Results The mean age of the patients was 57.81 ± 13.81 years, and the mean duration of ICU stay was 2.28 ± 3.88 days. There was a moderate positive relation between the stressors noise (r = .534; P < .01), thirst (r = .438; P < .01), loneliness (r = .410; P < .01), and pain (r = .404; P < .01) and the subscale frightening experiences. However, there was a moderate, negative relation between the stressors inability to speak (r = −.444; P < .01), surrounding speeches (r = −.458; P < .01), equipment noise (r = −.490; P < .01), and physical exercise (r = −.546; P < .01) and the subscale satisfaction with care. Conclusions The patients associated stressors with satisfaction and frightening experiences in the early period of their discharge from the ICU. As stressors increases, so do frightening experiences, and satisfaction with care is affected negatively. Relevance to clinical practice Currently, stressors to which patients discharged from ICU are exposed during their admission to wards are not evaluated in practice. This study is important in that it can help health professionals be aware of effects of stressors on patients in the early period of their discharge.

show abstract

Tools for assessment of acute psychological distress in critical illness: A scoping review

Kusi-Appiah

Karanikola

Pant

et al. 2021

Australian Critical Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Patients' experience of psychological distress in the intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with adverse effects, reduced satisfaction, and delayed physical and psychological recovery. There are no specific guidelines for the assessment and management of acute psychological distress during hospitalisation in the ICU. We reviewed existing tools for the assessment of acute psychological distress in ICU patients, examined evidence on their metric properties, and identified potential gaps and methodological considerations. Method: A scoping review based on literature searches (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica Database, PsycINFO, Scopus, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, Dissertations and Theses Global, and Google Scholar) and predefined eligibility criteria was conducted as per current scoping review guidelines. Findings: Overall, 14 assessment tools were identified having been developed in diverse ICU settings. The identified tools assess mainly anxiety and depressive symptoms and ICU stressors, and investigators have reported various validity and reliability metrics. It was unclear whether available tools can be used in specific groups, such as noncommunicative patients and patients with delirium, brain trauma, stroke, sedation, and cognitive impairments. Conclusion: Available tools have methodological limitations worth considering in future investigations. Given the high prevalence of psychiatric morbidity in ICU survivors, rigorously exploring the metric integrity of available tools used for anxiety, depressive, and psychological distress symptom assessment in the vulnerable ICU population is a practice and research priority. Relevance to clinical practice: These results have implications for the selection and implementation of psychological distress assessment methods as a means for promoting meaningful patient-centred clinical outcomes and humanising ICU care experiences.

show abstract

Traumatic Stressors in the Intensive Care Unit: Iranian Patients’ and Nurses’ Viewpoints

Cited by 5 publications

References 24 publications

Perceived Severity of Stressors in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review and Semi-Quantitative Analysis of the Literature on the Perspectives of Patients, Health Care Providers and Relatives

Perceived Severity of Stressors in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review and Semi-Quantitative Analysis of the Literature on the Perspectives of Patients, Health Care Providers and Relatives

The relationship between stressors and intensive care unit experiences

Tools for assessment of acute psychological distress in critical illness: A scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About