***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Purpose To evaluate the psychological consequences among family members given the option to be present during the CPR of a relative , compared with those not routinely offered the option . Methods Prospect i ve , cluster-r and omized , controlled trial involving 15 prehospital emergency medical services units in France , comparing systematic offer for a relative to witness CPR with the traditional practice among 570 family members . Main outcome measure was 1-year assessment included proportion suffering post-traumatic stress disorder ( PTSD ) , anxiety and depression symptoms , and /or complicated grief . Results Among the 570 family members [ intention to treat ( ITT ) population ] , 408 ( 72 % ) were evaluated at 1 year . In the ITT population ( N = 570 ) , family members had PTSD-related symptoms significantly more frequently in the control group than in the intervention group [ adjusted odds ratio , 1.8 ; 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) 1.1–3.0 ; P = 0.02 ] as did family members to whom physicians did not propose witnessing CPR [ adjusted odds ratio , 1.7 ; 95 % CI 1.1–2.6 ; P = 0.02 ] . In the observed cases population ( N = 408 ) , the proportion of family members experiencing a major depressive episode was significantly higher in the control group ( 31 vs. 23 % ; P = 0.02 ) and among family members to whom physicians did not propose the opportunity to witness CPR ( 31 vs. 24 % ; P = 0.03 ) . The presence of complicated grief was significantly greater in the control group ( 36 vs. 21 % ; P = 0.005 ) and among family members to whom physicians did not propose the opportunity to witness resuscitation ( 37 vs. 23 % ; P = 0.003 ) . Conclusions At 1 year after the event , psychological benefits persist for those family members offered the possibility to witness the CPR of a relative in cardiac arrest BACKGROUND Family presence during resuscitation ( FPDR ) is supported by patients and their family members . Nurses , however , including critical care nurses who frequently implement resuscitative care , have mixed views . OBJECTIVES To determine the impact of online learning on critical care nurses ' perception of and self-confidence with FPDR . METHODS A 2-group , r and om assignment , pretest and posttest quasi-experimental study was conducted with critical care nurses recruited nationally . An online learning module on FPDR was developed and administered to the intervention group . Perceptions and self-confidence for FPDR were measured by using the Family Presence Risk- Benefit Scale ( FPR-BS ) and the Family Presence Self-confidence Scale ( FPS-CS ) . Two-factor , mixed-model factorial analysis of variance was used to compare mean scores . RESULTS A total of 74 critical care nurses participated in the study .  Mean FPR-BS and FPS-CS scores were significantly greater in the intervention group than in the control group . For the intervention group , mean scores on the FPR-BS increased from 3.63 to 4.07 ( P < .001 ) and on the FPS-CS increased from 4.24 to 4.57 ( P < .001 ) , signifying improved perception and self-confidence . Scores did not change significantly in the control group : mean FPR-BS score increased from 3.82 to 3.88 ( P = .23 ) and the mean FPS-CS score of 4.40 did not change ( P > .99 ) . CONCLUSIONS Online learning is a feasible and effective method for educating large numbers of critical care nurses about FPDR . Online learning can improve perceptions and self-confidence related to FPDR , which may promote more widespread adoption of FPDR into practice BACKGROUND Increasingly , patients ' families are remaining with them during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and invasive procedures , but this practice remains controversial and little is known about the practice s of critical care and emergency nurses related to family presence . OBJECTIVE To identify the policies , preferences , and practice s of critical care and emergency nurses for having patients ' families present during resuscitation and invasive procedures . METHODS A 30-item survey was mailed to a r and om sample of 1500 members of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses and 1500 members of the Emergency Nurses Association . RESULTS Among the 984 respondents , 5 % worked on units with written policies allowing family presence during both resuscitation and invasive procedures and 45 % and 51 % , respectively , worked on units that allowed it without written policies during resuscitation or during invasive procedures . Some respondents preferred written policies allowing family presence ( 37 % for resuscitation , 35 % for invasive procedures ) , whereas others preferred unwritten policies allowing it ( 39 % for resuscitation , 41 % for invasive procedures ) , Many respondents had taken family members to the bedside ( 36 % for resuscitation , 44 % for invasive procedure ) or would do so in the future ( 21 % for resuscitation , 18 % for invasive procedures ) , and family members often asked to be present ( 31 % for resuscitation , 61 % for invasive procedures ) . CONCLUSIONS Nearly all respondents have no written policies for family presence yet most have done ( or would do ) it , prefer it be allowed , and are confronted with requests from family members to be present . Written policies or guidelines for family presence during resuscitation and invasive procedures are recommended BACKGROUND The effect of family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation ( CPR ) on the family members themselves and the medical team remains controversial . METHODS We enrolled 570 relatives of patients who were in cardiac arrest and were given CPR by 15 prehospital emergency medical service units . The units were r and omly assigned either to systematic ally offer the family member the opportunity to observe CPR ( intervention group ) or to follow st and ard practice regarding family presence ( control group ) . The primary end point was the proportion of relatives with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-related symptoms on day 90 . Secondary end points included the presence of anxiety and depression symptoms and the effect of family presence on medical efforts at resuscitation , the well-being of the health care team , and the occurrence of medicolegal cl aims . RESULTS In the intervention group , 211 of 266 relatives ( 79 % ) witnessed  CPR  , as compared with 131 of 304 relatives ( 43 % ) in the control group . In the intention-to-treat analysis , the frequency of PTSD-related symptoms was significantly higher in the control group than in the intervention group ( adjusted odds ratio , 1.7 ; 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , 1.2 to 2.5 ; P=0.004 ) and among family members who did not witness CPR than among those who did ( adjusted odds ratio , 1.6 ; 95 % CI , 1.1 to 2.5 ; P=0.02 ) . Relatives who did not witness CPR had symptoms of anxiety and depression more frequently than those who did witness CPR . Family-witnessed CPR did not affect resuscitation characteristics , patient survival , or the level of emotional stress in the medical team and did not result in medicolegal cl aims . CONCLUSIONS Family presence during CPR was associated with positive results on psychological variables and did not interfere with medical efforts , increase stress in the health care team , or result in medicolegal conflicts . ( Funded by Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique 2008 of the French Ministry of Health ; Clinical Trials.gov number , NCT01009606 . ) OBJECTIVE . When a child presents to a trauma center with a serious injury , family members are often excluded from the initial trauma team evaluation . The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of a structured program of family presence during pediatric trauma team activations by measuring ( 1 ) the need for termination of family presence  , ( 2 ) times to completion of key parts of the trauma evaluation , and ( 3 ) the opinions of staff surveyed immediately after conclusion of family presence . METHODS . This was a cross-sectional study that combined prospect ively obtained data and surveys from trauma team evaluations in which family presence occurred , with retrospective chart review of all trauma activations during an 18-month study period . The study was conducted at a level 1 pediatric trauma center with a preestablished  family presence program  that assigns a staff member to screen family members for family presence , provide support , and record events . Times to completion of key components of the trauma evaluation were calculated and compared for cases with and without family presence . Cross-sectional surveys were performed immediately after each trauma team evaluation . RESULTS . A total of 197 family members participated in family presence .  There were no cases of interference with medical care by family members . Seven family members were asked to leave the trauma area by staff after initiation of family presence for various reasons . Times to completion of key components of the trauma evaluation did not differ significantly between enrolled patients with family presence and those without family presence . Surveys were completed for 136 cases , and the majority of providers reported that family presence either had no effect on or improved medical decision-making ( 97 % ) , institution of patient care ( 94 % ) , communication among providers ( 92 % ) , and communication with family members ( 98 % ) . CONCLUSIONS . This prospect i ve study suggests that there is an overall low prevalence of negative outcomes associated with family presence during pediatric trauma team evaluation after implementation of a structured family presence program . Excluding family members as a routine because of provider concerns about negative impact on clinical care does not seem to be indicated 
    Output:
    
Study findings demonstrated educational interventions can improve support for FPDR , as well as intent to offer it as an option .