Cited by 142Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsPalliative and Oncologic Care

Factors Associated With Family Satisfaction With End-of-Life Care in the ICU

Hinkle, Laura J., Bosslet, Gabriel T., Torke, Alexia M.·2015·Chest

Abstract

Background Family satisfaction with end-of-life care in the ICU has not previously been systematically reviewed. Our objective was to perform a review, synthesizing published data identifying factors associated with family satisfaction with end-of-life care in critically ill adult populations. Methods The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), MEDLINE Updated, EMBASE (Excerpta Medical Database), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PsycInfo, and PubMed. Two authors reviewed retrieved titles and abstracts. Studies describing nonadult and non-ICU populations or not addressing end-of-life care, family satisfaction, or factors affecting satisfaction were excluded. The remaining articles underwent full review and data extraction by two authors. Quality was assessed using a checklist based on the recommendations of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials group. Results The search yielded 1,072 articles, with 23 articles describing 14 studies meeting inclusion criteria. All studies obtained satisfaction data from family members via surveys and structured interviews. Specific communication strategies increasing satisfaction included: expressions of empathy, nonabandonment, and assurances of comfort and provision of written information. Additionally, support for shared decision-making, family presence at time of death, and specific patient-care measures such as extubation be…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1378/chest.14-1098

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Family support interventions may help reduce psychological impacts on family members, as suggested by four systematic reviews and two recent studies.

    “Family support interventions may help to reduce these psychological impacts, as suggested by four systematic reviews, 37,71,72,83 and two recent studies. 84,85”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hinkle, L. J., Bosslet, G. T., & Torke, A. M.
Affiliations
Indiana University Health (US)
Corresponding author
Hinkle, Laura J.
Venue
Chest
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-01
Volume
147
Issue
1
Pages
82-93
ISSN
0012-3692 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2012744799
Cited by
142
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3
FWCI
0.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • CHEST Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
family satisfaction, end-of-life care, intensive care unit, family communication, shared decision-making, palliative care, empathy, family presence at death, critical illness
MeSH terms
Decision Making, Family, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Patient Participation, Personal Satisfaction, Terminal Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review