BACKGROUND: For patients recovering from severe acute illness, admission to a long-term acute care hospital (LTAC) is an increasingly common alternative to continued management in an intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of LTAC transfer in patients with chronic critical illness. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study in United States hospitals from 2002 to 2006. SUBJECTS: Medicare beneficiaries with chronic critical illness, defined as mechanical ventilation and at least 14 days of intensive care. MEASURES: Survival, costs, and hospital readmissions. We used multivariate analyses and instrumental variables to account for differences in patient characteristics, the timing of LTAC transfer, and selection bias. RESULTS: A total of 234,799 patients met our definition of chronic critical illness. Of these, 48,416 (20.6%) were transferred to an LTAC. In the instrumental variable analysis, patients transferred to an LTAC experienced similar survival compared with patients who remained in an ICU [adjusted hazard ratio=0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96 to 1.01; P=0.27). Total hospital-related costs in the 180 days after admission were lower among patients transferred to LTACs (adjusted cost difference=-$13,422; 95% CI, -26,662 to -223, P=0.046). This difference was attributable to a reduction in skilled nursing facility admissions (adjusted admission rate difference=-0.591; 95% CI, -0.728 to -0.454; P<0.001). Total Medicare payments were higher (adjusted cost difference=$15,592; 95% CI, 6343 to 24,842; P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with chronic critical illness transferred to LTACs experience similar survival compared with patients who remain in ICUs, incur fewer health care costs driven by a reduction in postacute care utilization, however, invoke higher overall Medicare payments.
BACKGROUND: For patients recovering from severe acute illness, admission to a long-term acute care hospital (LTAC) is an increasingly common alternative to continued management in an intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of LTAC transfer in patients with chronic critical illness. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study in United States hospitals from 2002 to 2006. SUBJECTS: Medicare beneficiaries with chronic critical illness, defined as mechanical ventilation and at least 14 days of intensive care. MEASURES: Survival, costs, and hospital readmissions. We used multivariate analyses and instrumental variables to account for differences in patient characteristics, the timing of LTAC transfer, and selection bias. RESULTS: A total of 234,799 patients met our definition of chronic critical illness. Of these, 48,416 (20.6%) were transferred to an LTAC. In the instrumental variable analysis, patients transferred to an LTAC experienced similar survival compared with patients who remained in an ICU [adjusted hazard ratio=0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96 to 1.01; P=0.27). Total hospital-related costs in the 180 days after admission were lower among patients transferred to LTACs (adjusted cost difference=-$13,422; 95% CI, -26,662 to -223, P=0.046). This difference was attributable to a reduction in skilled nursing facility admissions (adjusted admission rate difference=-0.591; 95% CI, -0.728 to -0.454; P<0.001). Total Medicare payments were higher (adjusted cost difference=$15,592; 95% CI, 6343 to 24,842; P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with chronic critical illness transferred to LTACs experience similar survival compared with patients who remain in ICUs, incur fewer health care costs driven by a reduction in postacute care utilization, however, invoke higher overall Medicare payments.
Authors: Mark Unroe; Jeremy M Kahn; Shannon S Carson; Joseph A Govert; Tereza Martinu; Shailaja J Sathy; Alison S Clay; Jessica Chia; Alice Gray; James A Tulsky; Christopher E Cox Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2010-08-03 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Deborah A Taira; Todd B Seto; Richard Siegrist; Roberta Cosgrove; Ronna Berezin; David J Cohen Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Lakshmipathi Chelluri; Kyung Ah Im; Steven H Belle; Richard Schulz; Armando J Rotondi; Michael P Donahoe; Carl A Sirio; Aaron B Mendelsohn; Michael R Pinsky Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Timothy D Girard; John P Kress; Barry D Fuchs; Jason W W Thomason; William D Schweickert; Brenda T Pun; Darren B Taichman; Jan G Dunn; Anne S Pohlman; Paul A Kinniry; James C Jackson; Angelo E Canonico; Richard W Light; Ayumi K Shintani; Jennifer L Thompson; Sharon M Gordon; Jesse B Hall; Robert S Dittus; Gordon R Bernard; E Wesley Ely Journal: Lancet Date: 2008-01-12 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Anil N Makam; Oanh Kieu Nguyen; Lei Xuan; Michael E Miller; James S Goodwin; Ethan A Halm Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Jeremy M Kahn; Billie S Davis; Tri Q Le; Jonathan G Yabes; Chung-Chou H Chang; Derek C Angus Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2018-03-23 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Kimberly J Rak; Laura Ellen Ashcraft; Courtney C Kuza; Jessica C Fleck; Lisa C DePaoli; Derek C Angus; Amber E Barnato; Nicholas G Castle; Tina B Hershey; Jeremy M Kahn Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Juan C Mira; Joseph Cuschieri; Tezcan Ozrazgat-Baslanti; Zhongkai Wang; Gabriela L Ghita; Tyler J Loftus; Julie A Stortz; Steven L Raymond; Jennifer D Lanz; Laura V Hennessy; Babette Brumback; Philip A Efron; Henry V Baker; Frederick A Moore; Ronald V Maier; Lyle L Moldawer; Scott C Brakenridge Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Anil N Makam; Oanh Kieu Nguyen; Benjamin Kirby; Michael E Miller; Lei Xuan; Ethan A Halm Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 5.562