Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2014 Oct-Dec;26(4):339-46.
doi: 10.5935/0103-507X.20140052.

Intensive care unit visitation policies in Brazil: a multicenter survey

[Article in English, Portuguese]
Fernando José da Silva Ramos  1 , Renata Rego Lins Fumis  1 , Luciano Cesar Pontes de Azevedo  1 , Guilherme Schettino  1
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Intensive care unit visitation policies in Brazil: a multicenter survey

[Article in English, Portuguese]
Fernando José da Silva Ramos et al. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2014 Oct-Dec.

Abstract
in English, Portuguese

Objective: This study aimed to determine which visitation policy was the most predominant in Brazilian intensive care units and what amenities were provided to visitors.

Methods: Eight hundred invitations were sent to the e-mail addresses of intensivist physicians and nurses who were listed in the research groups of the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Network and the Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network. The e-mail contained a link to a 33-item questionnaire about the profile of their intensive care unit.

Results: One hundred sixty-two questionnaires from intensive care units located in all regions of the country, but predominantly in the Southeast and South (58% and 16%), were included in the study. Only 2.6% of the intensive care units reported having liberal visitation policies, while 45.1% of the intensive care units allowed 2 visitation periods and 69.1% allowed 31-60 minutes of visitation per period. In special situations, such as end-of-life cases, 98.7% of them allowed flexible visitation. About half of them (50.8%) did not offer any bedside amenities for visitors. Only 46.9% of the intensive care units had a family meeting room, and 37% did not have a waiting room.

Conclusion: Restrictive visitation policies are predominant in Brazilian intensive care units, with most of them allowing just two periods of visitation per day. There is also a lack of amenities for visitors.

Objetivo: Este estudo teve como objetivo determinar a política de visitação predominante nas unidades de terapia intensiva e quais comodidades proporcionadas aos visitantes.

Métodos: Foram enviados 800 convites a endereços de e-mail de médicos e enfermeiros intensivistas listados nos grupos de pesquisa da Rede da Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira e da Rede Brasileira de Pesquisa em Terapia Intensiva. A mensagem por e-mail continha um link para um questionário de 33 itens a respeito do perfil de suas respectivas unidades de terapia intensiva.

Resultados: Foram incluídos no estudo os questionários de 162 unidades de terapia intensiva localizadas em todas as regiões do país, mas foram predominantes as das Regiões Sudeste (58%) e Sul (16%). Apenas 2,6% das unidades de terapia intensiva relataram ter políticas liberais de visitação, enquanto 45,1% das unidades de terapia intensiva possibilitavam dois períodos diários de visitação e 69,1% permitiam de 31 a 60 minutos de visita por período. Em situações especiais, como casos de fim de vida, 98,7% delas permitiam visitas em horários flexíveis. Cerca de metade das unidades de terapia intensiva (50,8%) não oferecia qualquer comodidade aos visitantes. Apenas 46,9% das unidades de terapia intensiva tinham uma sala de reunião com familiares, e 37% não dispunham de uma sala de espera.

Conclusão: Nas unidades de terapia intensiva do Brasil, houve predominância de políticas restritivas de visitação, sendo que a maioria delas só permite dois períodos diários de visitação. Também há uma ausência de comodidades para os visitantes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: None.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Main reason for flexibility of the visitation policy.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Amenities offered to the visitors in intensive care unit waiting rooms.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Pochard F, Azoulay E, Chevret S, Lemaire F, Hubert P, Canoui P, Grassin M, Zittoun R, le Gall JR, Dhainaut JF, Schlemmer B, French FAMIREA Group Symptoms of anxiety and depression in family members of intensive care unit patients: ethical hypothesis regarding decision-making capacity. Crit Care Med. 2001;29(10):1893–1897. - PubMed
    1. Fumis RR, Deheinzelin D. Family members of critically ill cancer patients: assessing the symptoms of anxiety and depression. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35(5):899–902. - PubMed
    1. Azoulay E, Pochard F, Kentish-Barnes N, Chevret S, Aboab J, Adrie C, Annane D, Bleichner G, Bollaert PE, Darmon M, Fassier T, Galliot R, Garrouste-Orgeas M, Goulenok C, Goldgran-Toledano D, Hayon J, Jourdain M, Kaidomar M, Laplace C, Larché J, Liotier J, Papazian L, Poisson C, Reignier J, Saidi F, Schlemmer B, FAMIREA Study Group Risk of post-traumatic stress symptoms in family members of intensive care unit patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171(9):987–994. - PubMed
    1. Molter NC. Needs of relatives of critically ill patients: a descriptive study. Heart Lung. 1979;8(2):332–339. - PubMed
    1. Day A, Haj-Bakri S, Lubchansky S, Mehta S. Sleep, anxiety and fatigue in family members of patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a questionnaire study. Crit Care. 2013;17(3):R91. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms