This qualitative descriptive study examined experiences of patients, family members and clinicians with the Footprints Project, a relational tool designed to counter unintentional dehumanisation of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). The primary aim was to understand how the project affected perceptions of patient identity, inclusivity of care, and relational impact.
The research was conducted in a 29-bed university-affiliated ICU. Sixty-six people participated: 7 were survivors of critical illness, 19 were family members of survivors or decedents, and 40 were clinicians representing 10 different professional roles. Recruitment and data collection occurred across specified periods for each group.
The Footprints Project uses a brief written form to capture personal details about each patient. Selected excerpts from those forms are transcribed onto a whiteboard placed in the patient’s room so that personal information is visible to the care team and to visitors. The intent is to foreground the patient’s personhood and make personal context readily available during care interactions.
Patients and family members were invited to participate in semistructured interviews or focus groups after ICU discharge between October 2024 and August 2025. Clinicians were invited by email between January 2025 and May 2025. Focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and anonymised. Data collection modality differed by group: for patients and families, the majority of contacts were in-person (17 of 26, 65.3%); for clinicians, most participation was virtual (36 of 40, 90.0%).
Transcripts from interviews and focus groups underwent qualitative content analysis. The analytic process identified core categories that reflected participant perspectives and experiences with the Footprints Project. Participant demographics and exact professional roles were reported in the study sample but are summarized here by group counts and profession breadth (10 professions among clinicians).
Participants across groups described the Footprints Project as a tool that brought patient personhood into view. Key experiences included enhanced recognition of the patient as an individual rather than solely as a clinical case, more individualised conversations between clinicians and families/patients, and encouragement of use of preferred names. Survivors and families specifically valued being acknowledged as a person with history and preferences; clinicians reported that access to personal details changed conversational tone and focus.
Features of the Footprints Project that fostered inclusivity included increasing clinician awareness of patient vulnerabilities and cues for culturally sensitive care. Having personal details visible helped clinicians avoid making incorrect assumptions about a patient’s identity or background. Families saw the whiteboard and form as ways to communicate relevant cultural or personal information that might otherwise be overlooked in the ICU environment.
Clinicians described experiencing shared humanity through engagement with the Footprints Project. The tool was characterized as relational and patient-facing, supporting a more humanistic approach to critical care. Patients and family members reported that the acknowledgement of individual identity had emotional and relational value, reinforcing partnerships in care.
Participants identified barriers to consistent application of the Footprints Project. Inconsistency in how and when forms were completed and how whiteboards were updated was noted as a challenge. These observations highlighted implementation gaps and the need for more intentional strategies to ensure regular and reliable use across clinicians and shifts. Participants also contributed ideas for improving consistency and embedding the tool within routine workflows.
The Footprints Project was viewed as a relational instrument that supports person-centred, family-partnered care and humanism within the ICU. Study participants described positive effects on identity recognition, inclusivity of care, and clinician–patient/family relationships. The authors conclude that future work should focus on structured implementation strategies and on assessing how the Footprints Project can be sustained and embedded into routine clinical practice. Specific implementation methods and long-term outcomes were not detailed in the source and would require further study.