Augmentative and Alternative Communication Interventions in Critical and Acute Care With Mechanically Ventilated and Tracheostomy Patients: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Communication with nonspeaking patients is a critical challenge of person-centered care. This scoping review aimed to map the literature on augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) interventions for nonspeaking mechanically ventilated and tracheostomy patients in critical and acute care settings. METHOD: Electronic database, ancestry, and forward citation searches were conducted using eligibility criteria established a priori. Data were extracted, synthesized, and summarized according to scoping review methodology. Studies were categorized by type of intervention and summarized in terms of purpose, participants, design, quality appraisal (including validity and reliability of selected efficacy measures), and efficacy. RESULTS: Small-to-large treatment effect sizes indicated demonstrable impact on patient health and communication efficacy with high-tech and no-tech visual interface-based interventions and systematic nurse training interventions. Treatment effects primarily pertained to dependent variables of patient anxiety, communication satisfaction, comfort, symptom self-reporting, and nursing practice changes. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of high-quality AAC intervention research for mechanically ventilated and tracheostomy patients in critical and acute care settings. Emergent evidence suggests that select visual interface and nurse training interventions can impact efficacy of patient-provider communication and patients' overall health. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.26506102.

Exploring Communication Needs and Challenges in the Intensive Care Unit: A Survey Study From Providers' and Patients' Perspectives.

PURPOSE: Effective communication between nonspeaking patients and providers is critical for the quality of care in intensive care units (ICUs). This study aims to evaluate perspectives of health care providers and nonspeaking patients on effective communication and communication barriers in the ICU. METHOD: Qualitative and quantitative survey methodologies were employed to evaluate providers' and patients' perspectives on effective communication. Rating scales were utilized to measure patients' frustration levels and communication effectiveness. Open-ended questions were employed to reflect on barriers to communication in the ICU, instances of ineffective communication, and recommendations for enhancing effective communication. RESULTS: The results of the study suggest that nonspeaking patients experienced high levels of frustration due to ineffective communication. However, the data reveal that access to appropriate augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) strategies and materials could help mitigate patients' frustration. Providers mainly communicated via asking yes/no questions, which largely limited the information patients conveyed, leading to frequent communication breakdowns. Providers expressed a desire to participate in training programs to utilize appropriate AAC strategies and promote effective communication. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary survey results on perspectives of patients and providers on effective communication in the ICU. Both providers and patients reported experiencing challenges and frustration during their communication, due to barriers such as providers' insufficient training experience and lack of access to AAC materials. Skill training is warranted to promote effective patient-provider communication in intensive care settings. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.26339623.