Cargando…

Comfort-holding in critically ill children: a scoping review

PURPOSE: To understand and summarize the breadth of knowledge on comfort-holding in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). SOURCES: This scoping review was conducted using PRISMA methodology. A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane CENTRAL Register o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Laurie A., Moss, Stephana J., Martin, Dori-Ann, Rosgen, Brianna K., Wollny, Krista, Gilfoyle, Elaine, Fiest, Kirsten M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8370455/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34405358
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12630-021-02090-3
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To understand and summarize the breadth of knowledge on comfort-holding in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). SOURCES: This scoping review was conducted using PRISMA methodology. A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials. Search strategies were developed with a medical librarian and revised through a peer review of electronic search strategies. All databases were searched from inception to 14 April 2020. Only full-text articles available in English were included. All identified articles were reviewed independently and in duplicate using predetermined criteria. All study designs were eligible if they reported on comfort-holding in a PICU. Data were extracted independently and in duplicate. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Of 13,326 studies identified, 13 were included. Comfort-holding was studied in the context of end-of-life care, developmental care, mobilization, and as a unique intervention. Comfort-holding is common during end-of-life care with 77.8% of children held, but rare during acute management (51% of children < three years, < 5% of children ≥ three years). Commonly reported outcomes included child outcomes (e.g., physiologic measurements), safety outcomes (e.g., accidental line removal), parent outcomes (e.g., psychological symptoms), and frequency of holding. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of literature on comfort-holding in PICUs. This scoping review identifies significant gaps in the literature, including assessment of child-based outcomes of comfort-holding or safety assessment of comfort-holding, and highlights core outcomes to consider in future evaluations of this intervention including child-based outcomes, parent-based outcomes, and safety of the intervention. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12630-021-02090-3.