Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Provided information and parents’ comprehension at the time of admission of their child in pediatric intensive care unit

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Pediatrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study evaluated the first interaction (FI) between parents and health care providers at the time of admission of a child in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), and explored the extent to which parents understood the medical information. This prospective study took place in three French university-affiliated PICUs. Forty-two parents of 30 children were interviewed. The physician and nurse who took care of the child completed a questionnaire. We evaluated parents’ comprehension (excellent, fair, or poor) by comparing parents’ and physicians’ responses to six items: diagnosis, affected organ, reason for hospitalization, prognosis, treatments, and further investigations. Parent-physician FI occurred within 24 h of child’s admission. Two thirds of the parents were dissatisfied to wait before receiving information. Most of the parents had an excellent comprehension of the affected organ (n = 25/28, 89.3%) and prognosis (n = 26/30, 86.7%). Two thirds of the parents understood the reason for hospitalization (n = 18/28, 64.3%) and diagnosis (n = 19/30, 63.3%). Less than half the parents understood child’s treatments (n = 10/30, 33.3%) and further investigations (n = 8/21, 38.1%). When a nurse delivered information on treatment, parental comprehension improved (p = 0.053).

Conclusion: Parents complained of their wait time before receiving information. Most of them had an excellent comprehension. An improved communication between nurses and physicians is mandatory, and the active participation of nurses to give information to the parents should be encouraged.

What is known:

• In pediatric intensive care unit, health care providers deliver information to parents on their child’s condition, which fosters the trust between them to build a partnership.

• Various guidelines exist to help health care providers communicate with parents in PICU, but never mention the specific time of admission.

What is new:

• Even though parents could wait before entering the unit, they all received information on their child’s condition within 24 hours after admission.

• Parents understood the information well, and nurses improved the parental comprehension of the treatments by reformulating.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

FI:

First interaction

HCP:

Health care provider

PICU:

Pediatric intensive care unit

References

  1. Ames KE, Rennick JE, Baillargeon S (2011) A qualitative interpretive study exploring parents’ perception of the parental role in the paediatric intensive care unit. Intensive Crit Care Nurs 27(3):143–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2011.03.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Azoulay E, Chevret S, Leleu G, Pochard F, Barboteu M, Adrie C, Canoui P, le Gall JR, Schlemmer B (2000) Half the families of intensive care unit patients experience inadequate communication with physicians. Crit Care Med 28(8):3044–3049. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003246-200008000-00061

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Butler A, Willetts G, Copnell B (2015) Nurses’ perceptions of working with families in the paediatric intensive care unit. Nurs Crit Care 22(4):195–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/nicc.12142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chappuy H, Taupin P, Dimet J, Claessens YE, Tréluyer JM, Chéron G, the GFRUP (2012) Do parents understand the medical information provided in paediatric emergency departments? A prospective multicenter study. Acta Paediatr 101(10):1089–1094. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2012.02763.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Committee on hospital care and institute for patient- and family-centered care (2012) Patient- and family-centered care and the pediatrician’s role. Pediatrics 129(2):394–404. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-3084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Davidson JE, Powers K, Hedayat KM, Tieszen M, Kon AA, Shepard E, Spuhler V, Todres ID, Levy M, Barr J, Ghandi R, Hirsch G, Armstrong D, American College of Critical Care Medicine Task Force 2004–2005, Society of Critical Care Medicine (2007) Clinical practice guidelines for support of the family in the patient-centered intensive care unit: American College of Critical Care Medicine Task Force 2004-2005. Crit Care Med 35(2):605–622. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000254067.14607.EB

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Diaz-Caneja A, Gledhill J, Weaver T, Nadel S, Garralda E (2005) A child’s admission to hospital: a qualitative study examining the experiences of parents. Intensive Care Med 31(9):1248–1254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-005-2728-8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ebrahim S, Singh S, Parshuram CS (2013) Parental satisfaction, involvement, and presence after pediatric intensive care unit admission. J Crit Care 28(1):40–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2012.05.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. European Association for Children in Hospital Charter (1988) http://www.each-for-sick-children.org/each-charter/ Accessed 1 Sept 2017

  10. Fallowfield L, Jenkins V (2004) Communicating sad, bad, and difficult news in medicine. Lancet 363(9405):312–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)15392-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fumis RRL, Ranzani OT, Faria PP, Schettino G (2015) Anxiety, depression, and satisfaction in close relatives of patients in an open visiting policy intensive care unit in Brazil. J Crit Care 30(2):440.e1–440.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2014.11.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Haines C, Childs H (2005) Parental satisfaction with paediatric intensive care. Paediatr Care 17(7):37–41. https://doi.org/10.7748/paed.17.7.37.s24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Henrich NJ, Dodek P, Heyland D, Cook D, Rocker G, Kutsogiannis D, Dale C, Fowler R, Ayas N (2011) Qualitative analysis of an intensive care unit family satisfaction survey. Crit Care Med 39(5):1000–1005. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e31820a92fb

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Latour JM, van Goudoever JB, Hazelzet JA (2008) Parent satisfaction in the pediatric ICU. Pediatr Clin N Am 55(3):779–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcl.2008.02.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. LeClaire MM, Oakes JM, Weinert CR (2005) Communication of prognostic information for critically ill patients. Chest 128(3):1728–1735. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.128.3.1728

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Levetown M, the Committee on Bioethics (2008) Communicating with children and families: from everyday interactions to skill in conveying distressing information. Reaffirmed in May 2011. Pediatrics 121(5):e1441–e1460. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2008-0565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Meert KL, Eggly S, Pollack M, Anand KJ, Zimmerman J, Carcillo J, Newth CJ, Dean JM, Willson DF, Nicholson C, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network (2008) Parents’ perspectives on physician-parent communication near the time of a child’s death in the pediatric intensive care unit. Pediatr Crit Care Med 9(1):2–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PCC.0000298644.13882.88

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Meyer EC (2011) Family conferences in the pediatric intensive care unit: how meaningful and memorable? Pediatr Crit Care Med 12(6):685–687. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0b013e318220a418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Michelson KN, Clayman ML, Haber-Barker N, Ryan C, Rychlik K, Emanuel L, Frader J (2013) The use of family conferences in the pediatric intensive care unit. J Palliat Med 16(12):1595–1601. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2013.0284

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Michelson K, Clayman ML, Ryan C, Emanuel L, Frader J (2016) Communication during pediatric intensive care unit family conferences: a pilot study of content, communication, and parent perceptions. Health Commun 32(10):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1217450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mistraletti G, Mantovani ES, Moroni B et al (2017) A family information brochure and dedicated website to improve the ICU experience for patients’ relatives: an Italian multicenter before-and-after study. Intensive Care Med 43(1):69–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-016-4592-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Needle JS, O’Riordan M, Smith PG (2009) Parental anxiety and medical comprehension within 24 hrs of a childʼs admission to the pediatric intensive care unit. Pediatr Crit Care Med 10(6):668–674. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0b013e3181a706c9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. October TW, Watson AC, Hinds PS (2013) Characteristics of family conferences at the bedside versus the conference room in pediatric critical care. Pediatr Crit Care Med 14(3):e135–e142. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0b013e318272048d

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. October TW, Hinds PS, Wang J, Dizon ZB, Cheng YI, Roter DL (2016) Parent satisfaction with communication is associated with physician’s patient-centered communication patterns during family conferences. Pediatr Crit Care Med 17(6):490–497. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000000719

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Perruche F, Eche A, Der Sahakian G, Trabattoni E, Kierzek G, Claessens YE (2012) A standardized procedure of information to improve comprehension of patients admitted in the emergency observation unit. Eur J Emerg Med 19(1):58–59. https://doi.org/10.1097/MEJ.0b013e32834749cc

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. SRLF - SFAR (2009) “Mieux vivre la réanimation” 6ème conférence de consensus. http://gfrup.sfpediatrie.com/sites/default/files/u12548/conf_consesnus_2009_mieux_vivre_la_rea.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017

  27. Walter JK, Benneyworth BD, Housey M, Davis MM (2013) The factors associated with high-quality communication for critically ill children. Pediatrics 131(Supplement 1):S90–S95. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-1427k

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Watson AC, October TW (2016) Clinical nurse participation at family conferences in the pediatric intensive care unit. Am J Crit Care 25(6):489–497. https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2016817

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Authors thank the parents who agreed to take part in this study in difficult time, making this work possible. Authors also thank the health care providers of the three PICUs. This work was supported by the French Pediatric Society (Société Française de Pédiatrie). Authors thank Dr. Lisé DeLong, PhD, CPCRT, CCCM, Developmental Cognitive Rehabilitation Specialist, who took the time to proof the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire d’éthique médicale et de bioéthique, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne-Paris Cité, 45 rue des Saint-Pères, 75006, Paris, France

    Agathe Béranger

  2. Unité de recherche clinique, AP-HP hôpital Cochin-Necker, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne-Paris Cité, 89 rue d’Assas, 75006, Paris, France

    Agathe Béranger, Naïm Bouazza & Hélène Chappuy

  3. Service de réanimation et surveillance continue pédiatriques, Hôpital Robert Debré, Université Diderot-Paris 7, 48 boulevard Sérurier, 75019, Paris, France

    Charlotte Pierron

  4. Réanimation et surveillance continue médico-chirurgicale pédiatriques, Hôpital Necker Enfants-Malades, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne-Paris Cité, 149 rue de Sèvres, 75015, Paris, France

    Laure de Saint Blanquat

  5. EA 7323, Evaluation des thérapeutiques et pharmacologie périnatale et pédiatrique, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne-Paris Cité, 27 rue du faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France

    Naïm Bouazza

  6. Réanimation néonatale et pédiatrique, Hôpital Armand Trousseau, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, 26 avenue du Dr Arnold Netter, 75012, Paris, France

    Sandrine Jean

  7. Urgences pédiatriques, Hôpital Armand Trousseau, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, 26 avenue du Dr Arnold Netter, 75012, Paris, France

    Hélène Chappuy

Authors
  1. Agathe Béranger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charlotte Pierron
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laure de Saint Blanquat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Naïm Bouazza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sandrine Jean
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hélène Chappuy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A. Béranger contributed to the concept and design of the study, collected and analyzed the data, and drafted the initial manuscript.

H. Chappuy contributed to the concept and design of the study.

Charlotte Pierron, Laure de Saint Blanquat, and Sandrine Jean contributed in data collection.

Naïm Bouazza contributed in the design of the study and realized the statistics.

All authors contributed in a critical revision of the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Agathe Béranger.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

This study has been approved by the local institutional ethic review board (Necker Enfants-Malades teaching hospital, Paris) and by the French National Commission of Computing and Liberty (CNIL). Each parent consented to participate in this study, after oral and written information.

Additional information

Communicated by Patrick Van Reempts

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Béranger, A., Pierron, C., de Saint Blanquat, L. et al. Provided information and parents’ comprehension at the time of admission of their child in pediatric intensive care unit. Eur J Pediatr 177, 395–402 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-017-3075-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-017-3075-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation