# Emergency Physicians’ Perceptions, Knowledge, and Attitudes Toward Family Presence During Resuscitation in the Emergency Department: A Multicenter Survey-Based Cross-Sectional Study

## TL;DR

This study explores emergency physicians' views on allowing family members to be present during resuscitation in Saudi Arabia, finding general support but highlighting the need for better policies and training.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into emergency physicians' perceptions and attitudes toward family presence during resuscitation in the western region of Saudi Arabia.

## Key findings

- Most emergency physicians were unaware of family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) policies.
- Younger, male, and more experienced physicians showed higher awareness of FPDR.
- Nearly half of the participants supported implementing an FPDR policy.

## Abstract

Background: Cardiac arrest remains a significant public health issue, with high incidence rates in both in-hospital and out-of-hospital settings. The practice of family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) has gained attention for its potential benefits to patients and their families. This study evaluates the perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes of emergency physicians (EPs) regarding FPDR in the emergency department (ED) and aims to inform policy development at King Abdulaziz University Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Methods: A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted from January to April 2023, surveying EPs from multiple EDs across the western region of Saudi Arabia. Participants, certified in basic (BLS) or advanced life support (ALS), completed an anonymous online survey adapted from previous studies.

Results: Our study surveyed 122 EPs, with 112 completing the survey. Of the participants, 49.1% were aged 25-29 years, 61.6% were men, and 58.9% had 1-4 years of work experience. Awareness of FPDR was reported by 67.9% (n = 76) of participants. Only 3.6% (n = 4) had a policy allowing FPDR, while 6.3% (n = 7) had a policy prohibiting it. Additionally, 49.1% (n = 55) supported implementing an FPDR policy. Awareness of FPDR was significantly higher among younger, male, and more experienced physicians (p < 0.05). Higher perception and practice scores were observed among those aware of FPDR, those who had participated in CPR with a family member, and those without a prohibiting policy (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: EPs in the western region of Saudi Arabia generally support FPDR, recognizing its potential benefits. However, concerns about its impact on performance and medicolegal issues warrant further exploration. To implement effective FPDR policies, these concerns must be addressed, along with efforts to promote awareness and training. Future research should expand to include broader healthcare settings and multidisciplinary teams to develop comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines.