Family opinions on resuscitation and participation in end‑of‑life care in the emergency department: A cross‑sectional study
Ugur Akman1
, Aynur Koyuncu2
1Department of Emergency, University of Health Sciences Van Training and Research Hospital, Van, Turkey,
2Department of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Hasan Kalyoncu University, Gaziantep, Turkey
Keywords: End-of-life, emergency nursing, family presence during resuscitation, family‑centered care, nursing
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study looked into emergency department family members’ (FMs) views on being present during resuscitation and contributing to end of life care.
METHODS: A cross sectional study with 467 FM volunteers of mildly injured or ill patients was conducted at a research hospital between October 2021 and May 2022. Data were collected using a questionnaire administered by a clinical psychologist. The analysis employed SPSS 22.0 with a significance threshold of P < 0.05. The study was conducted according to the STROBE criteria. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
RESULTS: The mean FMs’ age was 34.3 ± 10.43; 64.2% were male, 62.1% were married, and 76.9% had nuclear families. About 61% wanted the option of being present during resuscitation, with 47.5% desiring participation in both resuscitation and end of life care. Significant differences were observed in opinions based on education, work status, and resuscitation training (P = 0.015, P = 0.001, P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Many FMs sought the choice to be present during resuscitation, and nearly half preferred participation in both resuscitation and end of life care.
How to cite this article: Akman U, Koyuncu A. Family opinions on resuscitation and participation in end-of-life care in the emergency department: A cross-sectional study. Turk J Emerg Med 2024;24(1):48-54.
Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Hasan Kalyoncu University, Non-Interventional Research Ethics Board. Ethics Committee on November 16, 2021 (Approval Number: 2021/5318).
Approval received.
• UA: Conceptualization, methodology, investigation, software, resources, data curation, visualization, and writing.
• AK: Conceptualization, methodology, investigation, software, resources, data curation, visualization, writing – review and editing, supervision, and project administration.
• All authors read and approved the final manuscript. We have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
None Declared.
None.