Content area

Abstract

Summary Background

In relatives of patients dying in intensive care units (ICUs), inadequate team support can increase the prevalence of prolonged grief and other psychological harm. We aimed to evaluate whether a proactive communication and support intervention would improve relatives' outcomes.

Methods

We undertook a prospective, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial in 34 ICUs in France, to compare standard care with a physician-driven, nurse-aided, three-step support strategy for families throughout the dying process, following a decision to withdraw or withhold life support. Inclusion criteria were relatives of patients older than 18 years with an ICU length of stay 2 days or longer. Participating ICUs were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) into an intervention cluster and a control cluster. The randomisation scheme was generated centrally by a statistician not otherwise involved in the study, using permutation blocks of non-released size. In the intervention group, three meetings were held with relatives: a family conference to prepare the relatives for the imminent death, an ICU-room visit to provide active support, and a meeting after the patient's death to offer condolences and closure. ICUs randomly assigned to the control group applied their best standard of care in terms of support and communication with relatives of dying patients. The primary endpoint was the proportion of relatives with prolonged grief (measured with PG-13, score ≥30) 6 months after the death. Analysis was by intention to treat, with the bereaved relatives as the unit of observation. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02955992.

Findings

Between Feb 23, 2017, and Oct 8, 2019, we enrolled 484 relatives of ICU patients to the intervention group and 391 to the control group. 379 (78%) relatives in the intervention group and 309 (79%) in the control group completed the 6-month interview to measure the primary endpoint. The intervention significantly reduced the number of relatives with prolonged grief symptoms (66 [21%] vs 57 [15%]; p=0·035) and the median PG-13 score was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (19 [IQR 14–26] vs 21 [15–29], mean difference 2·5, 95% CI 1·04–3·95).

Interpretation

Among relatives of patients dying in the ICU, a physician-driven, nurse-aided, three-step support strategy significantly reduced prolonged grief symptoms.

Funding

French Ministry of Health

Details

Title
A three-step support strategy for relatives of patients dying in the intensive care unit: a cluster randomised trial
Author
Kentish-Barnes, Nancy 1 ; Chevret, Sylvie 2 ; Valade, Sandrine 3 ; Jaber, Samir 4 ; Kerhuel, Lionel 1 ; Guisset, Olivier 5 ; Martin, Maëlle 6 ; Mazaud, Amélie 7 ; Papazian, Laurent 8 ; Argaud, Laurent 9 ; Demoule, Alexandre 10 ; Schnell, David 11 ; Lebas, Eddy 12 ; Ethuin, Frédéric 13 ; Hammad, Emmanuelle 14 ; Merceron, Sybille 15 ; Audibert, Juliette 16 ; Blayau, Clarisse 17 ; Delannoy, Pierre-Yves 18 ; Lautrette, Alexandre 19 ; Lesieur, Olivier 20 ; Renault, Anne 21 ; Reuter, Danielle 22 ; Terzi, Nicolas 23 ; Philippon-Jouve, Bénédicte 24 ; Fiancette, Maud 25 ; Ramakers, Michel 26 ; Rigaud, Jean-Philippe 27 ; Souppart, Virginie 1 ; Asehnoune, Karim 28 ; Champigneulle, Benoît 29 ; Goldgran-Toledano, Dany 30 ; Dubost, Jean-Louis 31 ; Pierre-Edouard Bollaert 32 ; Chouquer, Renaud 33 ; Pochard, Frédéric 34 ; Cariou, Alain 35 ; Azoulay, Elie 36 

 AP-HP Nord, Saint Louis Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Famiréa Research Group, Paris, France 
 Department of Biostatistics and Medical Information, UMR 1153, ECSTRRA Team, INSERM, Paris University, Saint Louis Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France 
 AP-HP Nord, Saint Louis Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Famiréa Research Group, Paris, France; AP-HP Centre, Cochin Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Paris, France 
 Saint Eloi University Hospital, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Montpellier and PhyMedExp, University of Montpellier, INSERM, CNRS, Montpellier, France 
 Saint André University Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Bordeaux, France 
 Hôtel Dieu University Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Nantes, France 
 Hospices Civils de Lyon, Edouard Herriot University Hospital, Surgical Intensive Care, Lyon, France 
 AP-HM, Hôpital Nord, Medical Intensive Care and Aix-Marseille University, Faculté des Sciences Médicales et Paramédicales, Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches sur les Services de Santé et qualité de vie EA 3279, Marseille, France 
 Hospices Civils de Lyon, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, and Université de Lyon, Lyon, France 
10  AP-HP Sorbonne Université, La Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Medical Intensive Care Unit and Sorbonne Université, INSERM, UMRS1158 Neurophysiologie Respiratoire Expérimentale et Clinique, Paris, France 
11  Angoulême Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Angoulême, France 
12  Bretagne Atlantique Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Vannes, France 
13  Côte de Nacre University Hospital, Surgical Intensive Care, Caen, France 
14  AP-HM, Hospital Nord, Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Marseille, France 
15  André Mignot Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Le Chesnay, France 
16  Louis Pasteur Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Chartres, France 
17  AP-HP Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Paris, France 
18  Chatilliez Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Tourcoing, France 
19  Gabriel Montpied University Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Clermont Ferrand, France 
20  La Rochelle Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, La Rochelle, France 
21  Cavale Blanche University Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Brest, France 
22  Sud Francilien Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Evry, France 
23  Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Grenoble, France 
24  Roanne Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Roanne, France 
25  Les Oudairies Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, La Roche-sur-Yon, France 
26  Saint Lô Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Saint Lô, France 
27  Dieppe Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Dieppe, Paris 
28  Hôtel Dieu University Hospital, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Nantes, France 
29  AP-HP Centre, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Department of Aaesthesia and Critical Care, Paris, France 
30  Montfermeil Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Montfermeil, France 
31  René Dubos Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Pontoise, France 
32  University Hospital Central, Medical Intensive Care, Nancy, France 
33  Annecy Hospital, Medical and Surgical Intensive Care, Annecy, France 
34  AP-HP Nord, Saint Louis Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Famiréa Research Group, Paris, France; AP-HP Nord, Fernand Widal Hospital, DMU Neurosciences, Département de Psychiatrie et de Médecine Addictologique, Paris, France 
35  AP-HP Centre, Cochin Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Paris, France; Paris University, Paris, France 
36  AP-HP Nord, Saint Louis Hospital, Medical Intensive Care, Famiréa Research Group, Paris, France; Department of Biostatistics and Medical Information, UMR 1153, ECSTRRA Team, INSERM, Paris University, Saint Louis Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France 
Pages
656-664
Section
Articles
Publication year
2022
Publication date
Feb 12, 2022
Publisher
Elsevier Limited
ISSN
01406736
e-ISSN
1474547X
Source type
Scholarly Journal
Language of publication
English
ProQuest document ID
2627396039
Copyright
©2022. Elsevier Ltd