Encuesta nacional sobre cambios en las políticas de comunicación, visitas y cuidados al final de la vida en las unidades de cuidados intensivos durante las diferentes olas de la pandemia de COVID-19 (estudio COVIFAUCI) / National survey on changes in visitation, communication and end-of-life care policies in intensive care units through the different COVID-19 pandemic's waves (COVIFAUCI study)

Introducción La pandemia derivada de la infección por SARS-CoV-2 propició cambios en los cuidados tanto a familiares como a pacientes de cuidados intensivos durante las diferentes olas de incidencia del virus. La línea de humanización seguida por la mayoría de los hospitales se vio gravemente afectada por las restricciones aplicadas. Como objetivo, planteamos conocer las modificaciones experimentadas durante las diferentes olas de la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2 en España respecto a la política de visitas a los pacientes en UCI, el acompañamiento al final de la vida, y el uso de las nuevas tecnologías de la comunicación entre familiares, pacientes y profesionales. Métodos Estudio descriptivo transversal multicéntrico mediante encuesta a las UCI españolas desde febrero a abril de 2022. Se realizaron métodos de análisis estadísticos a los resultados según lo apropiado. El estudio fue avalado por la Sociedad Española de Enfermería Intensiva y Unidades Coronarias. Resultados Respondieron un 29% de las unidades contactadas. Los minutos de visita diarios de los familiares se redujeron drásticamente de 135 (87,5-255) a 45 (25-60) en el 21,2% de las unidades que permitían su acceso, mejorando levemente con el paso de las olas. En el caso de duelo, la permisividad fue mayor, aumentando el uso de las nuevas tecnologías para la comunicación paciente-familia en el caso del 96,5% de las unidades. Conclusiones Las familias de los pacientes ingresados en UCI durante las diferentes olas de la pandemia por COVID-19 han experimentado restricciones en las visitas y cambio de la presencialidad por técnicas virtuales de comunicación. Los tiempos de acceso se redujeron a niveles mínimos durante la primera ola, recuperándose con el avance de la pandemia pero sin llegar nunca a los niveles iniciales... (AU)

Introduction The pandemic derived from the SARS-CoV-2 infection led to changes in care for both relatives and intensive care patients during the different waves of incidence of the virus. The line of humanization followed by the majority of the hospitals was seriously affected by the restrictions applied. As an objective, we propose to know the modifications suffered during the different waves of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Spain regarding the policy of visits to patients in the ICU, monitoring at the end of life, and the use of new technologies of communication between family members, patients and professionals. Methods Multicenter cross-sectional descriptive study through a survey of Spanish ICUs from February to April 2022. Statistical analysis methods were performed on the results as appropriate. The study was endorsed by the Spanish Society of Intensive Nursing and Coronary Units. Results Twenty-nine percent of the units contacted responded. The daily visiting minutes of relatives dropped drastically from 135 (87.5-255) to 45 (25-60) in the 21.2% of units that allowed their access, improving slightly with the passing of the waves. In the case of bereavement, the permissiveness was greater, increasing the use of new technologies for patient-family communication in the case of 96.5% of the units. Conclusions The family of patients admitted to the ICU during the different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic have suffered restrictions on visits and a change from face-to-face to virtual communication techniques. Access times were reduced to minimum levels during the first wave, recovering with the advance of the pandemic but never reaching initial levels. Despite the implemented solutions and virtual communication, efforts should be directed towards improving the protocols for the humanization of healthcare that allow caring for families and patients whatever the healthcare context. (AU)

Encuesta nacional sobre cambios en las políticas de comunicación, visitas y cuidados al final de la vida en las unidades de cuidados intensivos durante las diferentes olas de la pandemia de COVID-19 (estudio COVIFAUCI) / National survey on changes in visitation, communication and end-of-life care policies in intensive care units through the different COVID-19 pandemic's waves (COVIFAUCI study)

Introducción La pandemia derivada de la infección por SARS-CoV-2 propició cambios en los cuidados tanto a familiares como a pacientes de cuidados intensivos durante las diferentes olas de incidencia del virus. La línea de humanización seguida por la mayoría de los hospitales se vio gravemente afectada por las restricciones aplicadas. Como objetivo, planteamos conocer las modificaciones experimentadas durante las diferentes olas de la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2 en España respecto a la política de visitas a los pacientes en UCI, el acompañamiento al final de la vida, y el uso de las nuevas tecnologías de la comunicación entre familiares, pacientes y profesionales. Métodos Estudio descriptivo transversal multicéntrico mediante encuesta a las UCI españolas desde febrero a abril de 2022. Se realizaron métodos de análisis estadísticos a los resultados según lo apropiado. El estudio fue avalado por la Sociedad Española de Enfermería Intensiva y Unidades Coronarias. Resultados Respondieron un 29% de las unidades contactadas. Los minutos de visita diarios de los familiares se redujeron drásticamente de 135 (87,5-255) a 45 (25-60) en el 21,2% de las unidades que permitían su acceso, mejorando levemente con el paso de las olas. En el caso de duelo, la permisividad fue mayor, aumentando el uso de las nuevas tecnologías para la comunicación paciente-familia en el caso del 96,5% de las unidades. Conclusiones Las familias de los pacientes ingresados en UCI durante las diferentes olas de la pandemia por COVID-19 han experimentado restricciones en las visitas y cambio de la presencialidad por técnicas virtuales de comunicación. Los tiempos de acceso se redujeron a niveles mínimos durante la primera ola, recuperándose con el avance de la pandemia pero sin llegar nunca a los niveles iniciales... (AU)

Introduction The pandemic derived from the SARS-CoV-2 infection led to changes in care for both relatives and intensive care patients during the different waves of incidence of the virus. The line of humanization followed by the majority of the hospitals was seriously affected by the restrictions applied. As an objective, we propose to know the modifications suffered during the different waves of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Spain regarding the policy of visits to patients in the ICU, monitoring at the end of life, and the use of new technologies of communication between family members, patients and professionals. Methods Multicenter cross-sectional descriptive study through a survey of Spanish ICUs from February to April 2022. Statistical analysis methods were performed on the results as appropriate. The study was endorsed by the Spanish Society of Intensive Nursing and Coronary Units. Results Twenty-nine percent of the units contacted responded. The daily visiting minutes of relatives dropped drastically from 135 (87.5-255) to 45 (25-60) in the 21.2% of units that allowed their access, improving slightly with the passing of the waves. In the case of bereavement, the permissiveness was greater, increasing the use of new technologies for patient-family communication in the case of 96.5% of the units. Conclusions The family of patients admitted to the ICU during the different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic have suffered restrictions on visits and a change from face-to-face to virtual communication techniques. Access times were reduced to minimum levels during the first wave, recovering with the advance of the pandemic but never reaching initial levels. Despite the implemented solutions and virtual communication, efforts should be directed towards improving the protocols for the humanization of healthcare that allow caring for families and patients whatever the healthcare context. (AU)

Isolating residents including wandering residents in care and group homes: Medical ethics and English law in the context of Covid-19.

This article investigates the lawfulness of isolating residents of care and group homes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many residents are mobile, and their freedom to move is a central ethical tenet and human right. It is not however an absolute right and trade-offs between autonomy, liberty and health need to be made since COVID-19 is highly infectious and poses serious risks of critical illness and death. People living in care and group homes may be particularly vulnerable because recommended hygiene practices are difficult for them and many residents are elderly, and/or have co-morbidities. In some circumstances, the trade-offs can be made easily with the agreement of the resident and for short periods of time. However challenging cases arise, in particular for residents and occupants with dementia who 'wander', meaning they have a strong need to walk, sometimes due to agitation, as may also be the case for some people with developmental disability (e.g. autism), or as a consequence of mental illness. This article addresses three central questions: (1) in what circumstances is it lawful to isolate residents of social care homes to prevent transmission of COVID-19, in particular where the resident has a strong compulsion to walk and will not, or cannot, remain still and isolated? (2) what types of strategies are lawful to curtail walking and achieve isolation and social distancing? (3) is law reform required to ensure any action to restrict freedoms is lawful and not excessive? These questions emerged during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and are still relevant. Although focussed on COVID-19, the results are also relevant to other future outbreaks of infectious diseases in care and group homes. Likewise, while we concentrate on the law in England and Wales, the analysis and implications have international significance.

COVID-19, Moral Conflict, Distress, and Dying Alone.

COVID-19 has truly affected most of the world over the past many months, perhaps more than any other event in recent history. In the wake of this pandemic are patients, family members, and various types of care providers, all of whom share different levels of moral distress. Moral conflict occurs in disputes when individuals or groups have differences over, or are unable to translate to each other, deeply held beliefs, knowledge, and values. Such conflicts can seriously affect healthcare providers and cause distress during disastrous situations such as pandemics when medical and human resources are stretched to the point of exhaustion. In the current pandemic, most hospitals and healthcare institutions in the United States have not allowed visitors to come to the hospitals to see their family or loved ones, even when the patient is dying. The moral conflict and moral distress (being constrained from doing what you think is right) among care providers when they see their patients dying alone can be unbearable and lead to ongoing grief and sadness. This paper will explore the concepts of moral distress and conflict among hospital staff and how a system-wide provider wellness programme can make a difference in healing and health.

[Humanize Death in a Time of Sanitary Crisis: Accompanied Die, Farewell and Receive Spiritual Care]. / Humanizar la Muerte en Tiempos de Crisis Sanitaria: Morir Acompañado, Despedirse y Recibir Atención Espiritual.

The crisis in the health system caused by COVID-19 has left some important humanitarian deficits on how to care for the sick in their last days of life. The humanization of the dying process has been affected in three fundamental aspects, each of which constitutes a medical and ethical duty necessary. In this study, I analyze why dying accompanied, with the possibility of saying goodbye and receiving spiritual assistance, constitutes a specific triad of care and natural obligations that should not be overlooked - even in times of health crisis - if we do not want to see human dignity violated and violated some fundamental rights derived from it.

Isolation of patients in psychiatric hospitals in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: An ethical, legal, and practical challenge.

Psychiatric inpatients are particularly vulnerable to the transmission and effects of COVID-19. As such, healthcare providers should implement measures to prevent its spread within mental health units, including adequate testing, cohorting, and in some cases, the isolation of patients. Respiratory isolation imposes a significant limitation on an individual's right to liberty, and should be accompanied by appropriate legal safeguards. This paper explores the implications of respiratory isolation in English law, considering the applicability of the common law doctrine of necessity, the Mental Capacity Act 2005, the Mental Health Act 1983, and public health legislation. We then interrogate the practicality of currently available approaches by applying them to a series of hypothetical cases. There are currently no 'neat' or practicable solutions to the problem of lawfully isolating patients on mental health units, and we discuss the myriad issues with both mental health and public health law approaches to the problem. We conclude by making some suggestions to policymakers.

Family Presence for Patients and Separated Relatives During COVID-19: Physical, Virtual, and Surrogate.

During an outbreak or pandemic involving a novel disease such as COVID-19, infected persons may need to undergo strict medical isolation and be separated from their families for public health reasons. Such a practice raises various ethical questions, the characteristics of which are heightened by uncertainties such as mode of transmission and increasingly scarce healthcare resources. For example, under what circumstances should non-infected parents be allowed to stay with their infected children in an isolation facility? This paper will examine ethical issues with three modes of "family presence" or "being there or with" a separated family member during the current COVID-19 pandemic: physical, virtual, and surrogate. Physical visits, stays, or care by family members in isolation facilities are usually prohibited, discouraged, or limited to exceptional circumstances. Virtual presence for isolated patients is often recommended and used to enable communication. When visits are disallowed, frontline workers sometimes act as surrogate family for patients, such as performing bedside vigils for dying patients. Drawing on lessons from past outbreaks such as the 2002-2003 SARS epidemic and the recent Ebola epidemic in West Africa, we consider the ethical management of these modes of family presence and argue for the promotion of physical presence under some conditions.

Achieving Safe, Effective, and Compassionate Quarantine or Isolation of Older Adults With Dementia in Nursing Homes.

Nursing homes are facing the rapid spread of COVID-19 among residents and staff and are at the centre of the public health emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As policy changes and interventions designed to support nursing homes are put into place, there are barriers to implementing a fundamental, highly effective element of infection control, namely the isolation of suspected or confirmed cases. Many nursing home residents have dementia, associated with impairments in memory, language, insight, and judgment that impact their ability to understand and appreciate the necessity of isolation and to voluntarily comply with isolation procedures. While there is a clear ethical and legal basis for the involuntary confinement of people with dementia, the potential for unintended harm with these interventions is high, and there is little guidance for nursing homes on how to isolate safely, while maintaining the human dignity and personhood of the individual with dementia. In this commentary, we discuss strategies for effective, safe, and compassionate isolation care planning, and present a case vignette of a person with dementia who is placed in quarantine on a dementia unit.

Moral Experiences of Crisis Management in a Child Mental Health Setting: A Participatory Hermeneutic Ethnographic Study.

Restraints and seclusion are routinely used in child mental health settings for conflict and crisis management, but raise significant ethical concerns. Using a participatory hermeneutic ethnographic framework, we studied conflict and crisis management in a child mental health setting offering care to children aged 6-12 years old in Quebec, Canada. The use of this framework allowed for an in-depth examination of the local imaginaries, of what is morally meaningful to the people in the setting, in addition to institutional norms, structures and practices. Data collection involved participant observation, interviews, and documentation review, with an interpretive framework for data analysis. We argue that the prevalent view of children shared by staff members as "incomplete human becomings" led to the adoption and legitimization of authoritative norms, structures and practices guided largely by a behavioral approach, which sometimes led to an increased use of control measures for reasons other than imminent harm. Children experienced these controlling practices as abusive and hindering the development of trusting relationships, which impeded the implementation of more collaborative approaches staff members sought to put in place to prevent the use of control measures. Study results are discussed in light of conceptions of children as moral agents.

Ethical challenges of seclusion in psychiatric inpatient wards: a qualitative study of the experiences of Norwegian mental health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Seclusion is an invasive clinical intervention used in inpatient psychiatric wards as a continuation of milieu therapy with vast behavioural implications that raise many ethical challenges. Seclusion is in Norway defined as an intervention used to contain the patient, accompanied by staff, in a single room, a separate unit, or an area inside the ward. Isolation is defined as the short-term confinement of a patient behind a locked or closed door with no staff present. Few studies examine how staff experiences the ethical challenges they encounter during seclusion. By making these challenges explicit and reflecting upon them, we may be able to provide better care to patients. The aim of this study is to examine how clinical staff in psychiatric inpatient wards describes and assess the ethical challenges of seclusion. METHODS: This study was based on 149 detailed written descriptions of episodes of seclusion from 57 psychiatric wards. A descriptive and exploratory approach was used. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The main finding is that the relationship between treatment and control during seclusion presents several ethical challenges. This is reflected in the balance between the staff's sincere desire to provide good treatment and the patients' behaviour that makes control necessary. Particularly, the findings show how taking control of the patient can be ethically challenging and burdensome and that working under such conditions may result in psychosocial strain on the staff. The findings are discussed according to four core ethical principles: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. CONCLUSION: Ethical challenges seem to be at the core of the seclusion practice. Systematic ethical reflections are one way to process the ethical challenges that staff encounters. More knowledge is needed concerning the ethical dimensions of seclusion and alternatives to seclusion, including what ethical consequences the psychosocial stress of working with seclusion have for staff.

Is it ethical to isolate study participants to prevent HIV transmission during trials with an analytical treatment interruption?

This commentary considers an extreme idea for protecting against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission to sex partners of individuals participating in HIV remission studies with an analytical treatment interruption (ATI). Other human challenge studies, such as studies of influenza, commonly isolate participants during the trial, to protect their contacts and the community against infection. Why should HIV studies with a treatment interruption be any different, one might wonder? This article concludes that isolation should not be used in HIV remission studies with an ATI but also shows that the matter is complex.

[What replaces the locked door? : Conceptual and ethical considerations regarding open door policies, formal coercion and treatment pressures]. / Wodurch wird die geschlossene Tür ersetzt? : Konzeptionelle und ethische Überlegungen zu offenen Unterbringungsformen, formellem Zwang und psychologischem Druck.

BACKGROUND: Mental health professionals use various strategies to prevent involuntarily committed persons from absconding under an open door policy. OBJECTIVE: To provide an ethical framework for the evaluation of the replacement of locked ward doors by formal coercion or treatment pressures. METHODS: Empirically informed conceptual and ethical analysis. RESULTS: The replacement of locked ward doors by formal coercive measures applied to individual persons, such as mechanical restraint or seclusion, is ethically problematic. The use of treatment pressures, for example in the context of intensified observational measures, requires a differentiated ethical evaluation and does not necessarily constitute the milder means in comparison to locked ward doors. CONCLUSION: Unexplored conceptual, empirical and ethical issues surrounding open door policies and treatment pressures should be clarified by means of psychiatric and ethical research. In clinical practice, the choice of the least burdensome and least restrictive measures for involuntarily committed persons should be facilitated by appropriate ethical support services.

Isolating infectious patients: organizational, clinical, and ethical issues.

BACKGROUND: Isolating infectious patients is essential to reduce infection risk. Effectiveness depends on identifying infectious patients, transferring them to suitable accommodations, and maintaining precautions. METHODS: Online study to address identification of infectious patients, transfer, and challenges of maintaining isolation in hospitals in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: Forty-nine responses were obtained. Decision to isolate is made by infection prevention teams, clinicians, and managers. Respondents reported situations where isolation was impossible because of the patient's physical condition or cognitive status. Very sick patients and those with dementia were not thought to tolerate isolation well. Patients were informed about the need for isolation by ward nurses, sometimes with explanations from infection prevention teams. Explanations were often poorly received and comprehended, resulting in complaints. Respondents were aware of ethical dilemmas associated with isolation that is undertaken in the interests of other health service users and society. Organizational failures could delay initaiting isolation. Records were kept of the demand for isolation and/or uptake, but quality was variable. CONCLUSION: Isolation has received the most attention in countries with under-provision of accommodations. Our study characterizes reasons for delays in identifying patients and failures of isolation, which place others at risk and which apply to any organization regardless of availability. It also highlights the ethical dilemmas of enforcing isolation.

[From constraint to containment through the nursing link]. / De la contention à la contenance par le lien soignant.

The implementation of a sufficiently strict, adapted care setting provides constructive support for a move away from isolation and restraint towards new spaces of freedom. The account of the evolutive management of a patient by a nursing team in Bourg-en-Bresse, presents possible therapeutic strategies.

[The respect of the right to freedom of movement, an indicator of good quality patient management]. / Le respect du droit d'aller et venir, indicateur d'une prise en charge de qualité.

Freedom of movement is at the centre of contradictory challenges for the different people working in psychiatry, faced with a society demanding social regulation and safety, and the desire of institutions to provide high quality care. This freedom, and more globally the respect of patients' civil rights, are an indicator of the expected quality of care. Taking these rights into consideration does not mean neglecting safety, but attempts to put it into perspective. This article presents the clinical case of a patient.

Acceptability and use of coercive methods across differing service configurations with and without seclusion and/or psychiatric intensive care units.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare across different service configurations the acceptability of containment methods to acute ward staff and the speed of initiation of manual restraint. BACKGROUND: One of the primary remits of acute inpatient psychiatric care is the reduction in risks. Where risks are higher than normal, patients can be transferred to a psychiatric intensive care unit or placed in seclusion. The abolition or reduction in these two containment methods in some hospitals may trigger compensatory increases in other forms of containment which have potential risks. How staff members manage risk without access to these facilities has not been systematically studied. DESIGN: The study applied a cross-sectional design. METHODS: Data were collected from 207 staff at eight hospital sites in England between 2013 - 2014. Participants completed two measures; the first assessing the acceptability of different forms of containment for disturbed behaviour and the second assessing decision-making in relation to the need for manual restraint of an aggressive patient. RESULTS: In service configurations with access to seclusion, staff rated seclusion as more acceptable and reported greater use of it. Psychiatric intensive care unit acceptability and use were not associated with its provision. Where there was no access to seclusion, staff were slower to initiate restraint. There was no relationship between acceptability of manual restraint and its initiation. CONCLUSION: Tolerance of higher risk before initiating restraint was evident in wards without seclusion units. Ease of access to psychiatric intensive care units makes little difference to restraint thresholds or judgements of containment acceptability.

Psychiatric Nurses' Emotional and Ethical Experiences Regarding Seclusion and Restraint.

The purpose of this study was to describe psychiatric nurses' emotional and ethical experiences regarding seclusion and restraint, and factors associated with these experiences. The data (n = 165) was collected in southern Finland, using the electronic version of the Seclusion and Restraint Experience Questionnaire (SREQ) and analyzed with statistical methods. We found that the experiences of control and duty were strongly emphasized in responses, especially among nurses with short work experience or temporary employment. These results offer new information about psychiatric nurses' experiences regarding seclusion and restraint. These results can be utilized both in the teaching and in management of the nursing.