Skip to main content

Table 3 Study outcomes

From: Statistical analysis plan for a cluster-randomized crossover trial comparing the effectiveness and safety of a flexible family visitation model for delirium prevention in adult intensive care units (the ICU Visits Study)

Outcomes

FFVM

RFVM

Type of effect estimate

Effect estimate (CI)

p valuea

Primary

 Cumulative incidence of delirium:b n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

Secondary

 Patients

  Daily hazard of delirium:b mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx.x (xx.x)

HR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)**

x.xx

  Any ICU-acquired infection:c n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  Proportion of ventilator free-days: mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx.x (xx.x)

MD

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)**

x.xx

  ICU length of stay: mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx.x (xx.x)

MD

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)**

x.xx

  Hospital mortality: n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)**

x.xx

 Family members

  HADS anxiety score: mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx.x (xx.x)

MD

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)***

x.xx

  HADS depression score: mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx.x (xx.x)

MD

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)***

x.xx

  CCFNI satisfaction score: mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx.x (xx.x)

MD

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)***

x.xx

 ICU professionals

  Burnout syndrome:d n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

PR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

Tertiary

 Patients

  Need for antipsychotic agents: n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  Need for mechanical restraints: n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  Unplanned loss of invasive devices: n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  Proportion of coma-free days: mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx. (xx.x)

MD

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  ICU-acquired pneumonia:c n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  ICU-acquired UTI:c n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  ICU-acquired BSI:c n/total n (%)

x/x (xx.x)

x/x (xx.x)

RR

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

 Family members

  Self-perception of involvement in patient care

   Score:e mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx.x (xx.x)

MD

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  ICU professionals

   Satisfaction of ICU professionals with the ICU visiting policy score:f mean (SD)

xx.x (xx.x)

xx.x (xx.x)

MD

x.xx (x.xx-x.xx)*

x.xx

  1. BSI bloodstream infection, CCFNI Critical Care Family Needs Inventory, CI confidence interval, FFVM flexible family visitation model, HADS Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HR hazard ratio, ICU intensive care unit, MD mean difference, PR prevalence ratio, RFVM restrictive family visitation model, RR risk ratio, SD standard deviation, UTI urinary tract infection
  2. aAdjusted for multiple comparisons with Bonferroni correction when appropriate
  3. bAccording to the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) criteria
  4. cAccording to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria
  5. dMaslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) total score > − 9
  6. eThe self-perception of involvement in patient care score varies from 0 (no involvement) to 27 (maximum degree of involvement)
  7. fThe satisfaction of ICU professionals with the ICU visiting policy score varies from 0 (unsatisfied) to 4 (very satisfied)
  8. *95% confidence interval
  9. **99% confidence interval
  10. ***98.3% confidence interval