Psychological needs and their determinants among family members of ICU patients: a mixed-methods study

Family members of patients in intensive care units (ICU) experience substantial psychological stress, primarily driven by uncertainty about prognosis, restricted visitation policies, and insufficient communication with healthcare professionals; however, their needs remain inadequately recognized and addressed in routine clinical practice. To examine the levels, associated factors, and lived experiences of psychological needs among ICU patients’ family members using a mixed-methods approach. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was conducted in a tertiary hospital in China. Quantitative data were collected from 200 family members of ICU patients using the Critical Care Family Needs Inventory and analyzed with descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression. Limited de-identified patient clinical data were extracted in accordance with the ethics-approved protocol. Qualitative data were obtained from semi-structured interviews with 16 family members and analyzed using Colaizzi’s phenomenological method. Findings were integrated using a joint display approach. A total of 200 family members completed the quantitative survey, and 16 participated in individual interviews. The overall psychological-needs score was 145.39 ± 19.59. Assurance had the highest mean item score (3.75 ± 0.35), followed by Information (3.51 ± 0.49), Proximity (3.45 ± 0.50), Support (2.89 ± 0.61), and Comfort (2.78 ± 0.87). Factors associated with psychological needs varied across dimensions, including ICU experience and occupation for Assurance; residence and illness understanding for Support; cohabitation, ethnicity, illness understanding, and age for Information; occupation for Proximity; and religious belief for Comfort. Qualitative analysis identified five major domains: personal distress, assurance needs, information and communication needs, proximity needs, and guidance needs. The qualitative findings converged with the quantitative findings for Assurance, Information, and Proximity, partially converged for Support, and expanded the quantitative assessment by identifying personal distress and guidance needs. Psychological needs of ICU patients’ family members extend beyond those captured by quantitative measures, with emotional support and guidance often underrecognized. Discrepancies between measured and lived experiences highlight the value of mixed-methods approaches and the need for more responsive family-centered care.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Nursing
Published
2026-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-026-05533-8
Primary Topic
Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Psychological needs and their determinants among family members of ICU patients: a mixed-methods study

Hengyang Wang, Zhigang Zhang, Tian Hao, Donghui Jia et al.
BMC Nursing
Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
article

Psychological needs and their determinants among family members of ICU patients: a mixed-methods study

Hengyang Wang, Zhigang Zhang, Tian Hao, Donghui Jia, Haohao Xie, Lulu Han, Lin Zhang, Ruirui Qi, Wenxiu Niu
article en

Abstract

Family members of patients in intensive care units (ICU) experience substantial psychological stress, primarily driven by uncertainty about prognosis, restricted visitation policies, and insufficient communication with healthcare professionals; however, their needs remain inadequately recognized and addressed in routine clinical practice. To examine the levels, associated factors, and lived experiences of psychological needs among ICU patients’ family members using a mixed-methods approach. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was conducted in a tertiary hospital in China. Quantitative data were collected from 200 family members of ICU patients using the Critical Care Family Needs Inventory and analyzed with descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression. Limited de-identified patient clinical data were extracted in accordance with the ethics-approved protocol. Qualitative data were obtained from semi-structured interviews with 16 family members and analyzed using Colaizzi’s phenomenological method. Findings were integrated using a joint display approach. A total of 200 family members completed the quantitative survey, and 16 participated in individual interviews. The overall psychological-needs score was 145.39 ± 19.59. Assurance had the highest mean item score (3.75 ± 0.35), followed by Information (3.51 ± 0.49), Proximity (3.45 ± 0.50), Support (2.89 ± 0.61), and Comfort (2.78 ± 0.87). Factors associated with psychological needs varied across dimensions, including ICU experience and occupation for Assurance; residence and illness understanding for Support; cohabitation, ethnicity, illness understanding, and age for Information; occupation for Proximity; and religious belief for Comfort. Qualitative analysis identified five major domains: personal distress, assurance needs, information and communication needs, proximity needs, and guidance needs. The qualitative findings converged with the quantitative findings for Assurance, Information, and Proximity, partially converged for Support, and expanded the quantitative assessment by identifying personal distress and guidance needs. Psychological needs of ICU patients’ family members extend beyond those captured by quantitative measures, with emotional support and guidance often underrecognized. Discrepancies between measured and lived experiences highlight the value of mixed-methods approaches and the need for more responsive family-centered care.

BMC Nursing
Guizhou University (CN), Lanzhou University of Technology (CN), First Hospital of Lanzhou University (CN), Lanzhou University (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.