Literature DB >> 20877170

Do faculty intensivists have better outcomes when caring for patients directly in a closed ICU versus consulting in an open ICU?

Dani Hackner1, Chrisandra L Shufelt, David D Balfe, Michael I Lewis, Ashraf Elsayegh, Glenn D Braunstein, Zab Mosenifar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intensivists have been associated with decreased mortality in several studies, but in one major study, centers with intensivist-staffed units reported increased mortality compared with controls. We hypothesized that a closed unit, in which a unit-based intensivist directly provides and coordinates care on all cases, has improved mortality and utilization compared with an open unit, in which individual attendings and consultants provide care, while intensivists serve as supervising consultants.
METHODS: We undertook the retrospective study of outcomes in 2 intensive care units (ICUs)-a traditional open unit managed by faculty intensivists and a second closed unit overseen by the same faculty intensivists who coordinated the care on all patients in a large community hospital. PRIMARY OUTCOME: In-hospital mortality. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Hospital length of stay (LOS), ICU LOS, and relative costs of hospitalization.
RESULTS: From January 2006 to December 2007, we identified 2602 consecutive admissions to the 2 medical ICUs. Of all patients admitted to the closed and open units, 19.2% and 24.7%, respectively, did not survive (P < 0.001, adjusted for severity). Median hospital LOS was 10 days for the closed unit and 12 days for the open unit (P < 0.001). Median ICU LOS was 2.2 days for the closed unit and 2.4 days for the open unit (P = NS). The unadjusted cost index for the open unit was 1.11 relative to the closed unit (1.0) (P < 0.001). However, after adjusting for disease severity, cost differences were not significantly different.
CONCLUSIONS: We observed significant reductions in mortality and hospital LOS for patients initially admitted to a closed ICU versus an open unit. We did not observe a significant difference in ICU LOS or total cost after adjustment for severity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20877170     DOI: 10.3810/hp.2009.12.253

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hosp Pract (1995)        ISSN: 2154-8331


  6 in total

1.  Outcomes of Nurse Practitioner-Delivered Critical Care: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Janna S Landsperger; Matthew W Semler; Li Wang; Daniel W Byrne; Arthur P Wheeler
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  Intensive care unit model and in-hospital mortality among patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: A secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study.

Authors:  Isao Nagata; Toshikazu Abe; Hiroshi Ogura; Shigeki Kushimoto; Seitaro Fujishima; Satoshi Gando
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-05-28       Impact factor: 1.817

3.  Effects of time and day of admission on the outcome of critically ill patients admitted to ICU.

Authors:  Jose Orsini; Salil Rajayer; Noeen Ahmad; Nanda Din; Joaquin Morante; Ryan Malik; Ahmed Shim
Journal:  J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect       Date:  2016-12-15

4.  Mortality rate and other clinical features observed in Open vs closed format intensive care units: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qian Yang; Jin Long Du; Feng Shao
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 1.817

5.  Impact of staffing model conversion from a mandatory critical care consultation model to a closed unit model in the medical intensive care unit.

Authors:  Sung Jun Ko; Jaeyoung Cho; Sun Mi Choi; Young Sik Park; Chang-Hoon Lee; Chul-Gyu Yoo; Jinwoo Lee; Sang-Min Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Translational health technology and system schemes: enhancing the dynamics of health informatics.

Authors:  Marjo Rissanen
Journal:  Health Inf Sci Syst       Date:  2020-11-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.