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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2025 Sep 1;185(9):1138-1149.
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.3406.

Nurse-Led Family Support Intervention for Families of Critically Ill Patients: The FICUS Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Nurse-Led Family Support Intervention for Families of Critically Ill Patients: The FICUS Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Rahel Naef et al. JAMA Intern Med. .

Abstract

Importance: Among families of patients treated in intensive care units (ICUs), insufficient communication and support may increase family distress that can lead to adverse health outcomes. Family-focused care is recommended, but high-quality experimental research is lacking.

Objective: To determine whether a nurse-led, interprofessional, multicomponent family support intervention improves family satisfaction, communication quality, and support to families.

Design, setting, and participants: This study was a multicenter, cluster-randomized clinical trial with 1:1 allocation of ICUs using minimization. Family members of critically ill patients who were treated for at least 48 hours at 16 adult ICUs in 12 hospitals in Switzerland were enrolled between May 2022 and January 2024. The first follow-up after patient ICU discharge was completed in February 2024. Data of all participants were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, with the individual as the unit of inference.

Intervention: Intervention ICUs implemented a novel family nurse role that engaged and liaised with families, offered relationship-focused, psychoeducational support, and ensured interprofessional communication along the ICU trajectory. Control ICUs continued with usual care.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the family satisfaction with ICU care through the Family Satisfaction with ICU survey (range, 0-100), assessed after patient ICU discharge. Secondary outcomes included the quality of family-clinician communication, measured by the Questionnaire on Quality of Physician-Patient Interaction (range, 1-5), and cognitive and emotional support, assessed by the Family Perceived Support Questionnaire (range, 14-70).

Results: Of 2057 consecutively invited family members, 412 were enrolled in the intervention and 473 in the control arm (median age, 54 [IQR, 42-65] years; 429 partners [48%]; and 568 women [64%]). The intervention improved overall family satisfaction with ICU care by a mean difference (MD) between groups of 2.39 (95% CI, 0.31-4.47; P = .02). Sensitivity analyses adjusting for cluster- and individual-level characteristics in combination with multiple imputation confirmed this result. Satisfaction with involvement in decision-making was more strongly increased than satisfaction with care. Furthermore, the intervention improved communication (MD, 0.37; 95% CI; 0.16-0.58; P = .002), and cognitive and emotional support (MD, 8.71; 95% CI, 4.71-12.71, P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that a nurse-led, interprofessional family support intervention in ICU had a small, statistically significant, but clinically uncertain benefit on family satisfaction, and relevantly improved quality of communication and cognitive/emotional support of family.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05280691.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Participant Flow Through the FICUS Trial
aOne intensive care unit (ICU) alone, which was the largest one in the trial, did not reach 484 eligible family members.

Comment on

References

    1. Kynoch K, Ramis MA, McArdle A. Experiences and needs of families with a relative admitted to an adult intensive care unit: a systematic review of qualitative studies. JBI Evid Synth. 2021;19(7):1499-1554. doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00136 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shirasaki K, Hifumi T, Nakanishi N, et al. Postintensive care syndrome family: a comprehensive review. Acute Med Surg. 2024;11(1):e939. doi: 10.1002/ams2.939 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cameron JI, Chu LM, Matte A, et al. ; RECOVER Program Investigators (Phase 1: towards RECOVER); Canadian Critical Care Trials Group . One-year outcomes in caregivers of critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(19):1831-1841. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1511160 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Naef R, von Felten S, Ernst J. Factors influencing post-ICU psychological distress in family members of critically ill patients: a linear mixed-effects model. Biopsychosoc Med. 2021;15(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s13030-021-00206-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Azoulay E, Resche-Rigon M, Megarbane B, et al. Association of COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome with symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder in family members after ICU discharge. JAMA. 2022;327(11):1042-1050. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.2017 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Associated data