IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v27y2018i11-12p2300-2310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of a prolonged stay in the ICU on patients’ fundamental care needs

Author

Listed:
  • Claire Minton
  • Lesley Batten
  • Annette Huntington

Abstract

Aims and objectives To explore patients’, families’ and health professionals’ experiences of a long‐stay patient in an intensive care unit. Background The fast‐paced technologically driven intensive care unit environment, designed for a short patient stay, supports the provision of complex physiologically focused care for those with life‐threatening illnesses. Long‐stay patients with pronounced fundamental care needs fall outside predicted patient pathways, and nurses can find caring for these patients challenging. Design and methods A longitudinal, qualitative, multicase study of six cases from four New Zealand units. Case participants were patients, family members, nurses and other health professionals. Data collection methods included observation, conversations, interviews and document review. Data were analysed using thematic analysis, vignette development and trajectory mapping. Results Challenges and successes of providing fundamental care for long‐stay ICU patients are attributed to two interlinked factors. First, the biomedical model influences ICU nursing practices, resulting in prioritising tasks and technology for patient survival while simultaneously devaluing relational and comfort work. Fundamental psychosocial needs such as family presence, comfort, relationships and communication may be unmet. Second, the unit environment and culture have a significant impact on long‐stay patients’ ICU experiences and form physical and psychological barriers to families being present and involved. Some nurses negotiated these challenges to provide fundamental, patient‐ and family‐centred care by adopting an approach of knowing the patient and these nurses reported satisfaction when seeing patients’ positive responses. Conclusion The care environment and culture provide challenges to the provision of patient‐ and family‐centred care for long‐stay patients; however, when nurses prioritise knowing their patient these challenges can be overcome and patient and family distress reduced with the potential to improve patient outcomes. Relevance to clinical practice Recognition that patients have fundamental care needs irrespective of the setting where they receive care. Intensive care environments and cultures create challenges for nurses when there is such a heavy burden of physiological needs to be met and technological tasks to be undertaken, with a focus on acuity; however, improving provision fundamental care can result in positive patient outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Claire Minton & Lesley Batten & Annette Huntington, 2018. "The impact of a prolonged stay in the ICU on patients’ fundamental care needs," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2300-2310, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:11-12:p:2300-2310
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14184
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14184?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Debra Jackson & Olga Kozlowska, 2018. "Fundamental care—the quest for evidence," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2177-2178, June.
    2. Alvisa Palese & Jessica Longhini & Matteo Danielis, 2021. "To what extent Unfinished Nursing Care tools coincide with the discrete elements of The Fundamentals of Care Framework? A comparative analysis based on a systematic review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1-2), pages 239-265, January.
    3. Catharina Lindberg & Cecilia Fagerström & Ania Willman, 2018. "Patient autonomy in a high‐tech care context—A theoretical framework," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(21-22), pages 4128-4140, November.
    4. Alison Kitson, 2018. "Moving on…," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2175-2176, June.
    5. Cathleen Aspinall & Jenny M. Parr & Julia Slark & Denise Wilson, 2020. "The culture conversation: Report from the 2nd Australasian ILC meeting—Auckland 2019," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 1768-1773, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:11-12:p:2300-2310. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.