This hermeneutic review explores the impact of extracorporeal organ support on nurses, families, and critically ill children, highlighting its broader implications.
Background Using advanced forms of medical technology such as extracorporeal organ support to take over organ function in the face of critical illness is a manifestation of the technological expertise to support and prolong life. However, clinician focus on the technical aspects of extracorporeal organ support both in research and clinical practice has the tendency to relegate to the background and disregard multiple, non‐technical components such as the meanings, interactions, and experiences of nurses, families and other healthcare professionals. Aim To understand how experiences and social interactions of critically ill children, families, and healthcare professionals are influenced by the use of extracorporeal organ support. Design Hermeneutic review of the literature. Data Sources CINAHL, PubMed and Web of Science followed by cross‐citations and snowballing. Results A total of 24 studies were included in the review, representing four conceptual streams, namely (1) extracorporeal organ support as a biomedical intervention, (2) relationality concerning extracorporeal organ support, (3) performativity in using extracorporeal organ support and (4) the agential role of extracorporeal organ support. Conclusion The hermeneutic framework helped foreground perspectives demonstrating that extracorporeal organ support is not merely a piece of medical technology, but is an active fulcrum upon which human and material elements revolve, interact, and integrate to form multiple assemblages that can influence how the huge volume of nurse work can be reframed beyond the perpetuation of the patient‐machine connection and affect the ways by which patients and families are cared for. Impact Understanding extracorporeal organ support as more than a medical device can enable nurses to develop informed plans of care and advocate for the interests of the family and that of the critically ill child who remains a passive recipient of care in an intensive care bed. Patient or Public Contribution No patient or public contribution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Louie Jhon E. Lunaria (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: