Table 2 SWOT analysis

1. Volunteer program that is run by and tailored to university students and their needs

2. Introduces volunteers into a novel setting with minimal workload added to hospital staff

3. Program is self-sufficient financially

4. Increases communication between hospital staff and visitors, reducing visitor and staff stress and workload

5. Increased visitation and stimulation by volunteers particularly for non-sedated patients without or minimal visitors

6. Increases accessibility of shadowing opportunities to a more diverse university population

7. Multiple levels of emotional support for volunteers: fellow volunteers and their shift partner, student executive team, and ICUBP hospital staff representatives

1. Though minimized, the program requires involvement and partnerships with hospital staff

2. Implementation and evaluation have been non-empirical to date

3. Limitations on the diversity of volunteers, as students of low socioeconomic status may not have the resources to volunteer

1. Transfer and implementation of novel humanizing initiatives and programs between ICUs

 a. For example: implementing the Montreal Children’s Hospital’s Glass Door Project (https://www.thechildren.com/news-and-events/latest-news/glass-door-project) to the adult ICU sites

2. Implementation of ICU journals and impacting patients and visitors outcomes through student volunteers

3. Implementation of the program’s model into other hospital departments

1. Lack of staff buy-in to the program,

2. Negative emotional impact on students

3. Workload imposed on ICUBP volunteer student executives may be overwhelming