Family Presence During Resuscitation: Physiciansʼ Perceptions of Risk, Benefit, and Self-Confidence

2018 
BACKGROUND: Families often desire proximity to loved ones during life-threatening resuscitations and perceive clear benefits to being present. However, critical care nurses and physicians perceive risks and benefits. Whereas research is accumulating on nurses' perceptions of family presence, physicians' perspectives have not been clearly explicated. Psychometrically sound measures of physicians' perceptions are needed to create new knowledge and enhance collaboration among critical care nurses and physicians during resuscitation events. OBJECTIVE: This study tests 2 new instruments that measure physicians' perceived risks, benefits, and self-confidence related to family presence during resuscitation. METHODS: By a correlational design, a convenience sample of physicians (N = 195) from diverse clinical specialties in 1 hospital in the United States completed the Physicians' Family Presence Risk-Benefit Scale and Physicians' Family Presence Self-confidence Scale. RESULTS: Findings supported the internal consistency reliability and construct validity of both new scales. Mean scale scores indicated that physicians perceived more risk than benefit and were confident in managing resuscitations with families present, although more than two-thirds reported feeling anxious. Higher self-confidence was significantly related to more perceived benefit and less perceived risk (P = .001). Younger physicians, family practice physicians, and physicians who previously had invited family presence expressed more positive perceptions (P = .05-.001). DISCUSSION: These 2 new scales offer a means to assess key perceptions of physicians related to family presence. Further testing in diverse physician populations may further validate the scales and yield knowledge that can strengthen collaboration among critical care nurses and physicians and improve patient and family outcomes.
    • Correction
    • Source
    • Cite
    • Save
    • Machine Reading By IdeaReader
    54
    References
    5
    Citations
    NaN
    KQI
    []