Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Critical Care
Published in: Critical Care 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

Satisfaction with quality of ICU care for patients and families: the euroQ2 project

Authors: Hanne Irene Jensen, Rik T. Gerritsen, Matty Koopmans, Lois Downey, Ruth A. Engelberg, J. Randall Curtis, Peter E. Spronk, Jan G. Zijlstra, Helle Ørding

Published in: Critical Care | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Families’ perspectives are of great importance in evaluating quality of care in the intensive care unit (ICU). This Danish-Dutch study tested a European adaptation of the “Family Satisfaction in the ICU” (euroFS-ICU). The aim of the study was to examine assessments of satisfaction with care in a large cohort of Danish and Dutch family members and to examine the measurement characteristics of the euroFS-ICU.

Methods

Data were from 11 Danish and 10 Dutch ICUs and included family members of patients admitted to the ICU for 48 hours or more. Surveys were mailed 3 weeks after patient discharge from the ICU. Selected patient characteristics were retrieved from hospital records.

Results

A total of 1077 family members of 920 ICU patients participated. The response rate among family members who were approached was 72%. “Excellent” or “Very good” ratings on all items ranged from 58% to 96%. Items with the highest ratings were concern toward patients, ICU atmosphere, opportunities to be present at the bedside, and ease of getting information. Items with room for improvement were management of patient agitation, emotional support of the family, consistency of information, and inclusion in and support during decision-making processes. Exploratory factor analysis suggested four underlying factors, but confirmatory factor analysis failed to yield a multi-factor model with between-country measurement invariance. A hypothesis that this failure was due to misspecification of causal indicators as reflective indicators was supported by analysis of a factor representing satisfaction with communication, measured with a combination of causal and reflective indicators.

Conclusions

Most family members were moderately or very satisfied with patient care, family care, information and decision-making, but areas with room for improvement were also identified. Psychometric assessments suggest that composite scores constructed from these items as representations of either overall satisfaction or satisfaction with specific sub-domains do not meet rigorous measurement standards. The euroFS-ICU and other similar instruments may benefit from adding reflective indicators.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Haywood K, Brett J, Salek S, et al. Patient and public engagement in health-related quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research: what is important and why should we care? Findings from the first ISOQOL patient engagement symposium. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:1069–76.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Wiering B, de Boer D, Delnoij D. Patient involvement in the development of patient-reported outcome measures: a scoping review. Health Expect. 2017;20:11–23.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Kurtzman ET, Greene J. Effective presentation of health care performance information for consumer decision making: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99:36–43.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Boothroyd LJ, Lambert LJ, Ducharme A, et al. Challenge of informing patient decision making: what can we tell patients considering long-term mechanical circulatory support about outcomes, daily life, and end-of-life issues? Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7:179–87.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Curtis JR, Vincent JL. Ethics and end-of-life care for adults in the intensive care unit. Lancet. 2010;376:1347–53.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Adhikari NK, Fowler RA, Bhagwanjee S, Rubenfeld GD. Critical care and the global burden of critical illness in adults. Lancet. 2010;376:1339–46.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Azoulay E, Metnitz B, Sprung CL, et al. End-of-life practices in 282 intensive care units: data from the SAPS 3 database. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35:623–30.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Jensen HI, Ammentorp J, Ording H. Withholding or withdrawing therapy in Danish regional ICUs: frequency, patient characteristics and decision process. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011;55:344–51.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Thompson BT, Cox PN, Antonelli M, et al. Challenges in end-of-life care in the ICU: statement of the 5th International Consensus Conference in Critical Care: Brussels, Belgium, April 2003: executive summary. Crit Care Med. 2003;32:1781–4.CrossRef
10.
Aitken LM, Castillo MI, Ullman A, et al. What is the relationship between elements of ICU treatment and memories after discharge in adult ICU survivors? Aust Crit Care. 2016;29:5–14.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Stricker KH, Kimberger O, Brunner L, Rothen HU. Patient satisfaction with care in the intensive care unit: can we rely on proxies? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011;55:149–56.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Bowling A. Research Methods in Health. Investing Health and Health Services. 3rd ed. Buckingham: Open University Press; 2009.
13.
van den Broek JM, Brunsveld-Reinders AH, Zedlitz AM, et al. Questionnaires on family satisfaction in the adult ICU: a systematic review including psychometric properties. Crit Care Med. 2015;43:1731–44.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Wall RJ, Engelberg RA, Downey L, et al. Refinement, scoring, and validation of the Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit (FS-ICU) survey. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:271–9.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Curtis JR, Patrick DL, Engelberg RA, et al. A measure of the quality of dying and death. Initial validation using after-death interviews with family members. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2002;24:17–31.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Downey L, Curtis JR, Lafferty WE, et al. The Quality of Dying and Death Questionnaire (QODD): empirical domains and theoretical perspectives. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010;39:9–22.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Moselli NM, Debernardi F, Piovano F. Forgoing life sustaining treatments: differences and similarities between North America and Europe. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2006;50:1177–86.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Gerritsen RT, Hofhuis JG, Koopmans M, et al. Perception by family members and ICU staff of the quality of dying and death in the ICU: a prospective multicenter study in The Netherlands. Chest. 2013;143:357–63.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Jensen HI, Gerritsen RT, Koopmans M, et al. Families’ experiences of intensive care unit quality of care: Development and validation of a European questionnaire (euroQ2). J Crit Care. 2015;30:884–90.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
22.
Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. 2nd ed. NY: The Guilford Press; 2015.
23.
Edwards JR, Bagozzi RP. On the nature and direction of relationships between constructs and measures. Psychol Methods. 2000;5:155–74.CrossRefPubMed
24.
25.
Jarvis CB, Mackenzie SB, Podsakoff PM. A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. J Consum Res. 2013;30:199–218.CrossRef
26.
Schwarzkopf D, Behrend S, Skupin H, et al. Family satisfaction in the intensive care unit: a quantitative and qualitative analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39:1071–9.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Wright SE, Walmsley E, Harvey SE, et al. Family-Reported Experiences Evaluation (FREE) study: a mixed-methods study to evaluate families’ satisfaction with adult critical care services in the NHS. NIHR Journals Library: Southampton; 2015.
28.
Sarode V, Sage D, Phong J, Reeves J. Intensive care patient and family satisfaction. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2015;28:75–81.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Linnarsson JR, Bubini J, Perseius KI. A meta-synthesis of qualitative research into needs and experiences of significant others to critically ill or injured patients. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19:3102–11.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Lind R, Lorem GF, Nortvedt P, Hevroy O. Family members’ experiences of “wait and see” as a communication strategy in end-of-life decisions. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37:1143–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Stricker KH, Kimberger O, Schmidlin K, et al. Family satisfaction in the intensive care unit: what makes the difference? Intensive Care Med. 2009;35:2051–9.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Satisfaction with quality of ICU care for patients and families: the euroQ2 project
Authors
Hanne Irene Jensen
Rik T. Gerritsen
Matty Koopmans
Lois Downey
Ruth A. Engelberg
J. Randall Curtis
Peter E. Spronk
Jan G. Zijlstra
Helle Ørding
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Critical Care / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1364-8535
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1826-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Critical Care 1/2017 Go to the issue

Editorial

Decisions regarding admission to the ICU and international initiatives to improve the decision-making process

Research

Loxapine to control agitation during weaning from mechanical ventilation

Letter

Response to: Understanding the null hypothesis (H0) in non-inferiority trials

Erratum

Erratum to: Shock induced endotheliopathy (SHINE) in acute critical illness - a unifying pathophysiologic mechanism

Research

Time-dependent association of glucocorticoids with adverse outcome in community-acquired pneumonia: a 6-year prospective cohort study

Research

Video laryngoscopy does not improve the intubation outcomes in emergency and critical patients – a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials