[Can children visit their relatives in an adult ICU?]. / Les enfants peuvent-ils venir visiter leurs parents hospitalisés en réanimation oncohématologique?

For the last three years, our oncology ICU (intensive care unit) has been opened to visiting children between 0 and 18 years. Our objective was to attempt to decrease the psychological burden in critically ill cancer patients and their children. We report here the evaluation of this new policy. Encouraged by the child psychologists in our hospital, we first recorded the opinions of the nursing staff, patients and relatives about this innovative approach. As our preliminary findings were favourable, a liberalised greeting and education policy for visiting children was implemented. A dedicated procedure was followed in order to provide children with a better understanding of their parent's disease, to alleviate any traumatic experience the visit might cause and to create an environment where mutual confidence would reign. After 2 years, each visiting child, patient, accompanying parent and the nursing staff were directly questioned using a specifically designed questionnaire. The daily lives of the staff, children, families and patients themselves appeared to be dramatically improved, even in the most difficult medical situations. Based on these promising results, the new policy has definitively been adopted in our unit. We propose that children ought to be allowed to visit a parent in the ICU and that this policy warrants evaluation in other types of units.

Indwelling time and risk of infection of dialysis catheters in critically ill cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the lack of evidence to support routine scheduled replacement of dialysis catheters (DCs) this practice continues to be widely used in many intensive care units (ICUs). This study evaluated whether additional risks of catheter-related infection (CRI) are incurred with a conservative attitude in critically ill cancer patients. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective, observational study over a 14-month period in a 15-bed medicosurgical unit in a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Seventy-nine double-lumen DCs were evaluated in 47 patients. Incidence rates of infection per 1000 days of catheter use were examined over 7-day periods. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The mean indwelling time was 6.9+/-5.5 days. Twelve DCs (15.2%) were removed for suspected CRI. Catheter-tip cultures remained negative in 74 cases (93.7%). Overall, one bacteremic CRI, two colonization episodes, and two contaminations were diagnosed, leading to DC colonization and DC-related bacteremia incidence rates of, respectively, 5.4 and 1.8 per 1000 days. When the catheter colonization rate was examined at 7-day intervals, the incidence rate was similar whatever the indwelling time: 5.8, 4.8, and 6.0 per 1000 days, respectively, for the 49 catheters left in place for 7 days or less, 8-14 days (21 DCs), and more than 14 days (9 DCs). The DC colonization incidence rate was similar to that of the 42 short-term catheters inserted during the same period in the same patients (5.9 per 1000 days). CONCLUSIONS: The stable low risk for DC-related infections over time does not support the rationale for scheduled replacement, even in immunocompromised cancer patients.