OBJECTIVES: Identify patients at risk for intensive care unit readmission, the reasons for and rates of readmission, and mortality after their stay in the intensive care unit; describe the sensitivity and specificity of the Stability and Workload Index for Transfer scale as a criterion for discharge from the intensive care unit. METHODS: Adult, critical patients from intensive care units from two public hospitals in Porto Alegre, Brazil, comprised the sample. The patients' clinical and demographic characteristics were collected within 24 hours of admission. They were monitored until their final outcome on the intensive care unit (death or discharge) to apply the Stability and Workload Index for Transfer. The deaths during the first intensive care unit admission were disregarded, and we continued monitoring the other patients using the hospitals' electronic systems to identify the discharges, deaths, and readmissions. RESULTS: Readmission rates were 13.7% in intensive care unit 1 (medical-surgical, ICU1) and 9.3% in intensive care unit 2 (trauma and neurosurgery, ICU2). The death rate following discharge was 12.5% from ICU1 and 4.2% from ICU2. There was a statistically significant difference in Stability and Workload Index for Transfer (p<0.05) regarding the ICU1 patients' outcome, which was not found in the ICU2 patients. In ICU1, 46.5% (N=20) of patients were readmitted very early (within 48 hours of discharge). Mortality was high among those readmitted: 69.7% in ICU1 and 48.5% in ICU2. CONCLUSIONS: The Stability and Workload Index for Transfer scale showed greater efficacy in identifying patients more prone to readmission and death following discharge from a medical-surgical intensive care unit. The patients' intensive care unit readmission during the same hospitalization resulted in increased morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and total costs.
OBJECTIVES: Identify patients at risk for intensive care unit readmission, the reasons for and rates of readmission, and mortality after their stay in the intensive care unit; describe the sensitivity and specificity of the Stability and Workload Index for Transfer scale as a criterion for discharge from the intensive care unit. METHODS: Adult, critical patients from intensive care units from two public hospitals in Porto Alegre, Brazil, comprised the sample. The patients' clinical and demographic characteristics were collected within 24 hours of admission. They were monitored until their final outcome on the intensive care unit (death or discharge) to apply the Stability and Workload Index for Transfer. The deaths during the first intensive care unit admission were disregarded, and we continued monitoring the other patients using the hospitals' electronic systems to identify the discharges, deaths, and readmissions. RESULTS: Readmission rates were 13.7% in intensive care unit 1 (medical-surgical, ICU1) and 9.3% in intensive care unit 2 (trauma and neurosurgery, ICU2). The death rate following discharge was 12.5% from ICU1 and 4.2% from ICU2. There was a statistically significant difference in Stability and Workload Index for Transfer (p<0.05) regarding the ICU1 patients' outcome, which was not found in the ICU2 patients. In ICU1, 46.5% (N=20) of patients were readmitted very early (within 48 hours of discharge). Mortality was high among those readmitted: 69.7% in ICU1 and 48.5% in ICU2. CONCLUSIONS: The Stability and Workload Index for Transfer scale showed greater efficacy in identifying patients more prone to readmission and death following discharge from a medical-surgical intensive care unit. The patients' intensive care unit readmission during the same hospitalization resulted in increased morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and total costs.
Authors: Alexander Kogan; Jonathan Cohen; Ehud Raanani; Gideon Sahar; Boris Orlov; Pierre Singer; Bernardo A Vidne Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Philipp G H Metnitz; Fabienne Fieux; Barbara Jordan; Thomas Lang; Rui Moreno; Jean-Roger Le Gall Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2002-12-18 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Gregg K Nishi; Richard H Suh; Matthew T Wilson; Scott A Cunneen; Daniel R Margulies; M Michael Shabot Journal: Am Surg Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Nelleke van Sluisveld; Gijs Hesselink; Johannes Gerardus van der Hoeven; Gert Westert; Hub Wollersheim; Marieke Zegers Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Fábio Santos de Jesus; Daniel de Macedo Paim; Juliana de Oliveira Brito; Idiel de Araujo Barros; Thiago Barbosa Nogueira; Bruno Prata Martinez; Thiago Queiroz Pires Journal: Rev Bras Ter Intensiva Date: 2016-06
Authors: Mara Ambrosina de Oliveira Vargas; Elizabeth Peter; Kely Regina da Luz; Edison Luiz Devos Barlem; Carla Aparecida Arena Ventura; Eliane Regina Pereira do Nascimento Journal: Rev Lat Am Enfermagem Date: 2020-05-11
Authors: Ahmed Naji Balshi; Basim Mohammed Huwait; Alfateh Sayed Nasr Noor; Abdulrahman Mishaal Alharthy; Ahmed Fouad Madi; Omar Elsayed Ramadan; Abdullah Balahmar; Huda A Mhawish; Bobby Rose Marasigan; Alva Minette Alcazar; Muhammad Asim Rana; Waleed Tharwat Aletreby Journal: Rev Bras Ter Intensiva Date: 2020-07-13