From: Efficacy and safety of unrestricted visiting policy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis
No. | Study | Country | Study design | Sample size | Mean age | Intervention | Outcomes | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UVP | RVP | UVP | RVP | UVP | RVP | |||||
1 | Xueping 2021 | China | QE | 82 | 82 | 63.8 ± 8.59 | 63.87 ± 7.43 | The number and duration of visits were left to the patient’s preference, with the only restriction being a total time of 60 min | Single visitor per patient admitted for 20 min/d | ①②⑤⑦ |
2 | Xiliang 2020 | China | QE | 42 | 43 | 67.29 ± 7.19 | 64.58 ± 8.46 | The number and duration of visits were left to the patient’s preference, with the only restriction being a total time of 60 min | Single visitor per patient admitted for 30 min/d | ⑤⑦⑧⑨ |
3 | Zhongxi 2020 | China | QE | 34 | 32 | 65.16 ± 12.6 | 65.7 ± 11.3 | Two or fewer family visitors per patient at a time were allowed for up to 6 h/d, divided into six periods | Single visitor per patient admitted for 30 min/d | ⑤⑥⑦⑧⑨ |
4 | Rosa 2019 | Brazil, SUA, Italy | RCT | 837 | 848 | 58.4 ± 18.3 | 58.6 ± 18.2 | Two or fewer visitors at a time were allowed for up to 12 h/d | Two or fewer visitors per patient at a time were allowed for up to 4.5 h/d, TID | ①②③④⑤⑥⑦ |
5 | Lifei 2018 | China | RCT | 177 | 178 | 54.93 ± 17.58 | 56.14 ± 16.79 | The number and duration of visits were left to the patient’s preference | Single visitor per patient admitted for 30 min/d | ①②③④⑤ |
6 | Liping 2018 | China | QE | 85 | 71 | 60.08 ± 19.62 | 57.47 ± 18.53 | The number and duration of visits were left to the patient’s preference, with the only restriction being a total time of 90 min | Two or fewer visitors per patient admitted for 30 min/d | ⑤⑦ |
7 | Xinying 2017 | China | RCT | 60 | 60 | 65 ± 3.6 | The number and duration of visits were left to the patient’s preference | Single visitor per patient admitted for 20 min/d | ⑤ | |
8 | Eghbali-Babadi M, 2017 | Iran | RCT | 34 | 34 | 55.11 ± 12.11 | 54.12 ± 13.11 | The number and duration of visits were left to the patient’s preference | Single visitor per patient admitted for 30 min/d | ⑤ |
9 | Rosa 2017 | Brazil | QE | 145 | 141 | 60.5 ± 18.6 | 62.4 ± 20.6 | Two or fewer visitors at a time were allowed for up to 12 h/d | Two or fewer visitors per patient at a time were allowed for up to 4.5 h/d, TID | ①②③④⑤⑥⑦ |
10 | Malacarne 2011 | Italy | QE | 261 | 269 | 60.7 ± 17.8 | 58.3 ± 21.1 | Four visitors per patient were admitted for 90 min BID | Two visitors per patient admitted for 1 h/d | ①②③④⑥⑦ |
11 | Fumagalli 2006 | Italy | RCT | 111 | 115 | 68 ± 1 | 67 ± 1 | The number and duration of visits were left to the patient’s preference, with the only restriction being one visitor at a time | Single visitor per patient admitted for 30 min BID | ①②③④⑥⑧⑨ |