Health professionals' perceptions regarding family witnessed resuscitation in adult critical care settings

• Published in: Journal of clinical nursing 2015-09, Vol.24 (17-18), p.2611-2619
• Main Authors: Bashayreh, Ibrahim, Saifan, Ahmad, Batiha, Abdul-Monim, Timmons, Stephen, Nairn, Stuart
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Adults; Attitude of Health Personnel; Cardiopulmonary resuscitation; CPR; Critical Care; Families & family life; Family - psychology; family witnessed resuscitation; Female; health professionals; Humans; Jordan; Male; Medical personnel; Middle Aged; Nursing; Nursing Staff, Hospital - psychology; Perceptions; Professional-Family Relations; qualitative; Resuscitation - nursing; Surveys and Questionnaires; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0962-1067; 1365-2702
• DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12875

Aims and objectives To deepen our understanding of the perceptions of health professionals regarding family witnessed resuscitation in Jordanian adult critical care settings. Background The issue of family witnessed resuscitation has developed dramatically in the last three decades. The traditional practice of excluding family members during cardiopulmonary resuscitation had been questioned. Family witnessed resuscitation has been described as good practice by many researchers and health organisations. However, family witnessed resuscitation has been perceived by some practitioners to be unhealthy and harmful to the life‐saving process. The literature showed that there are no policies or guidelines to allow or to prevent family witnessed resuscitation in Jordan. Design An exploratory qualitative design was adopted. Methods A purposive sample of 31 health professionals from several disciplines was recruited over a period of six months. Individual semi‐structured interviews were used. These interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Findings It was found that most healthcare professionals were against family witnessed resuscitation. They raised several concerns related to being verbally and physically attacked if they allowed family witnessed resuscitation. Almost all of the respondents expressed their fears of patients’ family members’ interfering in their work. Most of the participants in this study stated that family witnessed resuscitation is traumatic for family members. This was viewed as a barrier to allowing family witnessed resuscitation in Jordanian critical care settings. Conclusion The study provides a unique understanding of Jordanian health professionals’ perceptions regarding family witnessed resuscitation. They raised some views that contest some arguments in the broader literature. Further research with patients, family members, health professionals and policy makers is still required. Relevance to clinical practice This is the first study about family witnessed resuscitation in Jordan. Considering multi‐disciplinary healthcare professionals’ views would be helpful when starting to implement this practice in Jordanian hospitals.