↓ Skip to main content

Visitation policies and practices in United States intensive care units.

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Visitation policies and practices in United States intensive care units.
Published in
Critical Care, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc12677
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liu V, Read JL, Scruth E, Cheng E, Vincent Liu, Julia Lindeman Read, Elizabeth Scruth, Eugene Cheng

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Prior reports suggest that restrictive ICU visitation policies can negatively impact patients and their loved ones. However, visitation practices in US ICUs, and the hospital factors associated with them, are not well described. METHODS: A telephone survey was made of ICUs, stratified by US region and hospital type (community, federal, or university), between 2008 and 2009. Hospital characteristics were self-reported and included the hospitals' bed number, critical care unit number, and presence of ICU leadership. Hospital and ICU visitation restrictions were based on five criteria: visiting hours; visit duration; number of visitors; age of visitors; and membership in the patient's immediate family. Hospitals or ICUs without restrictions had open visitation policies; those with any restriction had restrictive policies. RESULTS: The study surveyed 606 hospitals in the Northeast (17.0%), Midwest (26.2%), South (36.6%), and West (20.1%) regions; most were community hospitals (n = 401, 66.2%). The mean hospital size was 239 ± 217 beds; the mean percentage of ICU beds was 11.6% ± 13.4%. Hospitals often had restrictive hospital (n = 463, 76.4%) and ICU (n = 543, 89.6%) visitation policies. Many ICUs had ≥ 3 restrictions (n = 375; 61.9%), most commonly related to visiting hours and visitor number or age. Nearly all ICUs allowed visitation exceptions (n = 474; 94.8%). ICUs with open policies were more common in hospitals with < 150 beds. Among restrictive ICUs, the bed size, hospital type, number of critical care units, and ICU leadership were not associated with the number of restrictions. On average, hospitals in the Midwest had the least restrictive policies, while those in the Northeast had the most restrictive. CONCLUSION: In 2008 the overwhelming majority of US ICUs in this study had restrictive visitation policies. Wide variability in visitation policies suggests that further study into the impact of ICU visitations on care and outcomes remains necessary to standardize practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 83 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 17%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Postgraduate 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Other 26 30%
Unknown 10 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 33 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 14 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 March 2015.
All research outputs
#2,487,112
of 18,217,940 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,045
of 5,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,045
of 165,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#18
of 140 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,217,940 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 165,714 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 140 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.