OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
International journal of health care quality assurance
Feb 17, 2025;38 (1): 28-38.

The effect of family members' communication mode choice on the family's perceptions of care.

Adi Gerblich, Eran Rubin, Kathleen Kennedy
Author Information
  1. Adi Gerblich: Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
  2. Eran Rubin: Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
  3. Kathleen Kennedy: Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
PMID: 39630587 DOI: 10.1108/IJHCQA-06-2023-0040

Abstract

PURPOSE: Family-centered rounds (FCR) are a multidisciplinary process in which patients and/or family members are present and actively participate in medical rounds. While research has shown that FCR may enhance collaborative information exchange and reduce family anxiety, the impact of the information exchange modality on the experience has been largely unexplored. Medical rounds are typically assumed to be carried out in person at the bedside. In this research, we challenge this perception. We ask whether FCR communication is best conducted at the bedside or if similar communication outcomes are obtained when family members choose the communication mode according to their preferences.
DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Using a field experiment in which participants choose the communication mode, we empirically analyze perceptions of the resulting communication in terms of information exchange. Three communication modes are available for participants to choose from (i.e. patients' families): face-to-face (FtF), phone and video conferencing. A questionnaire is distributed, and the responses of the patients' family members are analyzed. ANOVA tests are carried out to analyze the effect of communication mode on family perceptions.
FINDINGS: Perceptions following video conferencing or FtF interaction were significantly higher than perceptions following the use of a phone. Thus, our results show clear superiority of video and FtF communication modes as facilitators of effective communication perceptions. There is also marginal evidence that FtF communication is perceived as superior than video conferencing in supporting the receipt of information and understanding but not in the ability to convey information and input to the care team. These results suggest that allowing family members to choose their communication preferences does not always support effective communication. A case can be made for motivating patient family members to use face-to-face or video communication rather than phone if possible.
ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The possible ramifications of allowing family members to choose communication mode with the care team have been largely unexplored. Medical rounds are typically assumed to be carried out in person at the bedside. In this research, we challenge this perception. We ask whether communication is best conducted at the bedside or whether similar communication outcomes are obtained when family members choose the communication mode according to their preferences.

Keywords

Family communication Family participation Family-centered rounds Quality of care Urgent care

References

  1. Abrams, K.M., Wang, Z., Song, Y.J. and Galindo-Gonzalez, S. (2015), ���Data richness trade-offs between face-to-face, online audiovisual, and online text-only focus groups���, Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 80-96, doi: 10.1177/0894439313519733.
  2. Akg��n, K.M., Shamas, T.L., Feder, S.L. and Schulman-Green, D. (2020), ���Communication strategies to mitigate fear and suffering among COVID-19 patients isolated in the ICU and their families���, Heart and Lung, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 344-345, doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2020.04.016.
  3. Amass, T.H., Villa, G., OMahony, S., Badger, J.M., McFadden, R., Walsh, T., Caine, T., McGuirl, D., Palmisciano, A., Yeow, M.E., De Gaudio, R., Curtis, J.R. and Levy, M.M. (2020), ���Family care rituals in the intensive care unit to reduce symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder in family members-a multicenter, multinational, before-and-after intervention trial���, Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 176-184, doi: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000004113.
  4. Aronson, P.L., Yau, J., Helfaer, M.A. and Morrison, W. (2009), ���Impact of family presence during pediatric intensive care unit rounds on the family and medical team���, Pediatrics, Vol. 124 No. 4, pp. 1119-1125, doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-0369.
  5. Azoulay, E., Chevret, S., Leleu, G., Pochard, F., Barboteu, M., Adrie, C., Canoui, P., Le Gall, J.R. and Schlemmer, B. (2000), ���Half the families of intensive care unit patients experience inadequate communication with physicians���, Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 3044-3049, doi: 10.1097/00003246-200008000-00061.
  6. Battiston, D., Blanes i Vidal, J. and Kirchmaier, T. (2021), ���Face-to-face communication in organizations���, The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 88 No. 2, pp. 574-609, doi: 10.1093/restud/rdaa060.
  7. Cattelan, J., Castellano, S., Merdji, H., Audusseau, J., Claude, B., Feuillassier, L., Cunat, S., Astri��, M., Aquin, C., Buis, G., Gehant, E., Granier, A., Kercha, H., Le Guillou, C., Martin, G., Roulot, K., Meziani, F., Putois, O. and Helms, J. (2021), ���Psychological effects of remote-only communication among reference persons of ICU patients during COVID-19 pandemic���, Journal of intensive care, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 1-11, doi: 10.1186/s40560-020-00520-w.
  8. Davidson, J.E., Jones, C. and Bienvenu, O.J. (2012), ���Family response to critical illness: postintensive care syndrome���family���, Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 618-624, doi: 10.1097/ccm.0b013e318236ebf9.
  9. Davidson, J.E., Aslakson, R.A., Long, A.C., Puntillo, K.A., Kross, E.K., Hart, J., Cox, C.E., Wunsch, H., Wickline, M.A., Nunnally, M.E., Netzer, G., Kentish-Barnes, N., Sprung, C.L., Hartog, C.S., Coombs, M., Gerritsen, R.T., Hopkins, R.O., Franck, L.S., Skrobik, Y., Kon, A.A., Scruth, E.A., Harvey, M.A., Lewis-Newby, M., White, D.B., Swoboda, S.M., Cooke, C.R., Levy, M.M., Azoulay, E. and Curtis, J.R. (2017), ���Guidelines for family-centered care in the neonatal, pediatric, and adult ICU���, Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 103-128, doi: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000002169.
  10. Dewatripont, M. and Tirole, J. (2005), ���Modes of communication���, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 113 No. 6, pp. 1217-1238, doi: 10.1086/497999.
  11. Feder, S., Smith, D., Griffin, H., Shreve, S.T., Kinder, D., Kutney���Lee, A. and Ersek, M. (2021), ������Why couldn't I go in to see him?��� Bereaved families' perceptions of end���of���life communication during COVID���19���, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 587-592, doi: 10.1111/jgs.16993.
  12. Ferran, C. and Watts, S. (2008), ���Videoconferencing in the field: a heuristic processing model���, Management Science, Vol. 54 No. 9, pp. 1565-1578, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1080.0879.
  13. Gay, E.B., Pronovost, P.J., Bassett, R.D. and Nelson, J.E. (2009), ���The intensive care unit family meeting: making it happen���, Journal of Critical Care, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 629-e1-629.e12, doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2008.10.003.
  14. Ha, J.F. and Longnecker, N. (2010), ���Doctor-patient communication: a review���, The Ochsner Journal, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 38-43.
  15. Heyland, D.K., Rocker, G.M., Dodek, P.M., Kutsogiannis, D.J., Konopad, E., Cook, D.J., Peters, S., Tranmer, J.E., O'Callaghan, C.J. and O'Callaghan, C.J. (2002), ���Family satisfaction with care in the intensive care unit: results of a multiple center study���, Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 1413-1418, doi: 10.1097/00003246-200207000-00002.
  16. Heyland, D.K., Tranmer, J.E. and Kingston General Hospital ICU Research Working Group (2001), ���Measuring family satisfaction with care in the intensive care unit: the development of a questionnaire and preliminary results���, Journal of Critical Care, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 142-149.
  17. Jacobowski, N.L., Girard, T.D., Mulder, J.A. and Ely, E.W. (2010), ���Communication in critical care: family rounds in the intensive care unit���, American Journal of Critical Care, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 421-430, doi: 10.4037/ajcc2010656.
  18. Jarvenpaa, S.L. and Leidner, D.E. (1999), ���Communication and trust in global virtual teams���, Organization Science, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 791-815, doi: 10.1287/orsc.10.6.791.
  19. Jin, B. and Park, N. (2013), ���Mobile voice communication and loneliness: cell phone use and the social skills deficit hypothesis���, New Media and Society, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 1094-1111, doi: 10.1177/1461444812466715.
  20. Khan, T.H. and MacEachen, E. (2022), ���An alternative method of interviewing: critical reflections on videoconference interviews for qualitative data collection���, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Vol. 21, doi: 10.1177/16094069221090063.
  21. Lehmann, L.S., Brancati, F.L., Chen, M.C., Roter, D. and Dobs, A.S. (1997), ���The effect of bedside case presentations on patients' perceptions of their medical care���, New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 336 No. 16, pp. 1150-1156, doi: 10.1056/nejm199704173361606.
  22. Mittal, V.S., Sigrest, T., Ottolini, M.C., Rauch, D., Lin, H., Kit, B., Landrigan, C.P. and Flores, G. (2010), ���Family-centered rounds on pediatric wards: a PRIS network survey of US and Canadian hospitalists���, Pediatrics, Vol. 126 No. 1, pp. 37-43, doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-2364.
  23. Moradi, Y., Baghaei, R., Hosseingholipour, K. and Mollazadeh, F. (2021), ���Challenges experienced by ICU nurses throughout the provision of care for COVID���19 patients: a qualitative study���, Journal of Nursing Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 1159-1168, doi: 10.1111/jonm.13254.
  24. Nardi, B.A. and Whittaker, S. (2002), ���The place of face-to-face communication in distributed work���, in Hinds, P. and Kiesler, S. (Eds), Distributed Work, Boston Review, pp. 83-110.
  25. Olson, G.M. and Olson, J.S. (2000), ���Distance matters���, Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 15 Nos 2-3, pp. 139-178, doi: 10.1207/s15327051hci1523_4.
  26. Rubin, A., Gattari, T.B., Monroe, K.K. and Mychaliska, K.P. (2020), ���A PRIS network survey study of faculty physicians' background and experiences with family-centered rounding���, Journal of Communication in Healthcare, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 228-233, doi: 10.1080/17538068.2020.1801315.
  27. Schegloff, E.A. (2000), ���Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation���, Language in Society, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 1-63, doi: 10.1017/s0047404500001019.
  28. Sprecher, S. (2014), ���Initial interactions online-text, online-audio, online-video, or face-to-face: effects of modality on liking, closeness, and other interpersonal outcomes���, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 31, pp. 190-197, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.029.
  29. Stelson, E.A., Carr, B.G., Golden, K.E., Martin, N., Richmond, T.S., Delgado, M.K. and Holena, D.N. (2016), ���Perceptions of family participation in intensive care unit rounds and telemedicine: a qualitative assessment���, American Journal of Critical Care, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 440-447, doi: 10.4037/ajcc2016465.
  30. Verhaeghe, S., Defloor, T., Van Zuuren, F., Duijnstee, M. and Grypdonck, M. (2005), ���The needs and experiences of family members of adult patients in an intensive care unit: a review of the literature���, Journal of Clinical Nursing, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 501-509, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2004.01081.x.
  31. Young, A.W., Fr��hholz, S. and Schweinberger, S.R. (2020), ���Face and voice perception: understanding commonalities and differences���, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 398-410, doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2020.02.001.
  32. Zack, M.H. (1993), ���Interactivity and communication mode choice in ongoing management groups���, Information Systems Research, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 207-239, doi: 10.1287/isre.4.3.207.

MeSH Term

Humans
Communication
Family
Professional-Family Relations
Male
Female
Middle Aged
Adult
Videoconferencing
Perception
Telephone
Surveys and Questionnaires
Journal Article

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0communicationfamilymemberschoosemoderoundsinformationperceptionsvideocarebedsideFtFFCRresearchexchangecarriedwhetherpreferencesphoneconferencingFamily-centeredlargelyunexploredMedicaltypicallyassumedpersonchallengeperceptionaskbestconductedsimilaroutcomesobtainedaccordingparticipantsanalyzemodespatients'face-to-faceeffectfollowinguseresultseffectiveteamallowingpossibleFamilyPURPOSE:multidisciplinaryprocesspatientsand/orpresentactivelyparticipatemedicalshownmayenhancecollaborativereduceanxietyimpactmodalityexperienceDESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH:UsingfieldexperimentempiricallyresultingtermsThreeavailableiefamilies:questionnairedistributedresponsesanalyzedANOVAtestsFINDINGS:PerceptionsinteractionsignificantlyhigherThusshowclearsuperiorityfacilitatorsalsomarginalevidenceperceivedsuperiorsupportingreceiptunderstandingabilityconveyinputsuggestalwayssupportcasecanmademotivatingpatientratherORIGINALITY/VALUE:ramificationsmembers'choicefamily'sparticipationQualityUrgent

Similar Articles

Cited By