Literature DB >> 28118657

Association of Intensive Care Unit Patient-to-Intensivist Ratios With Hospital Mortality.

Hayley B Gershengorn1, David A Harrison2, Allan Garland3, M Elizabeth Wilcox4, Kathryn M Rowan2, Hannah Wunsch5.   

Abstract

Importance: The patient-to-intensivist ratio (PIR) across intensive care units (ICUs) is not standardized and the association of PIR with patient outcome is not well established. Understanding the impact of PIR on outcomes is necessary to optimize senior medical staffing and deliver high-quality care. Objective: To test the hypotheses that: (1) there is significant variation in the PIR across ICUs and (2) higher PIRs are associated with higher hospital mortality for ICU patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort analysis of patients (≥16 years) admitted to ICUs staffed by a single intensivist during daytime hours in the United Kingdom from 2010 to 2013. Exposures: Patient-to-intensivist ratios, which we defined for each patient as the number of patients cared for by the intensivist each day averaged over the patient's stay. Main Outcomes and Measures: Using standard summary statistics, we evaluated PIR variation across ICUs. We used multivariable, mixed-effect, logistic regression analysis to evaluate the association between PIR and hospital mortality at ultimate discharge from acute hospital (primary outcome) and at ICU discharge. Finding: Among 49 686 adults in 94 ICUs, median age was 66 (interquartile range [IQR], 52-76) years, and 45.1% were women. The ultimate hospital mortality was 25.7%. The median PIR for patients was 8.5 (IQR, 6.9-10.8; full range, 1.0-23.5), and varied substantially among individual ICUs. The association between PIR and ultimate hospital mortality was U-shaped; there was a reduction in the odds of mortality associated with an increasing PIR up to 7.5 after which the odds of mortality increased again significantly (average patient mortality for lowest PIR, 22%; PIR of 7.5, 15%; highest PIR, 19%; P = .003). A similar U-shaped association was seen for PIR and mortality in the ICU (nadir of mortality at a PIR of 7.8, P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: PIR varied across UK ICUs. The optimal PIR in this cohort of UK ICU patients was 7.5, with significantly increased ICU and hospital mortality above and below this ratio. The number of patients cared for by 1 intensivist may impact patient outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28118657     DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8457

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Intern Med        ISSN: 2168-6106            Impact factor:   21.873


  23 in total

1.  Specialist not tertiary: Providing intensive care medicine in a district general hospital.

Authors:  Chris Thorpe; Louella Vaughan
Journal:  J Intensive Care Soc       Date:  2018-01-29

2.  [Intensive care studies from 2017/2018].

Authors:  C J Reuß; M Bernhard; C Beynon; A Hecker; C Jungk; C Nusshag; M A Weigand; D Michalski; T Brenner
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.041

3.  Near-simultaneous intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and all-cause mortality: a cohort study.

Authors:  Markos G Kashiouris; Curtis N Sessler; Rehan Qayyum; Venu Velagapudi; Christos Stefanou; Rahul Kashyap; Niall Crowley; Craig Daniels; Kianoush Kashani
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2019-09-17       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Intensive care medicine in smaller hospitals: here to stay.

Authors:  Christopher M Thorpe
Journal:  Future Healthc J       Date:  2020-02

5.  Intensivists in U.S. Acute Care Hospitals.

Authors:  Neil A Halpern; Kay See Tan; Meghan DeWitt; Stephen M Pastores
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 7.598

6.  Effect on Patient Safety of a Resident Physician Schedule without 24-Hour Shifts.

Authors:  Christopher P Landrigan; Shadab A Rahman; Jason P Sullivan; Eric Vittinghoff; Laura K Barger; Amy L Sanderson; Kenneth P Wright; Conor S O'Brien; Salim Qadri; Melissa A St Hilaire; Ann C Halbower; Jeffrey L Segar; John K McGuire; Michael V Vitiello; Horacio O de la Iglesia; Sue E Poynter; Pearl L Yu; Phyllis C Zee; Steven W Lockley; Katie L Stone; Charles A Czeisler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  ICU staffing feature phenotypes and their relationship with patients' outcomes: an unsupervised machine learning analysis.

Authors:  Fernando G Zampieri; Jorge I F Salluh; Luciano C P Azevedo; Jeremy M Kahn; Lucas P Damiani; Lunna P Borges; William N Viana; Roberto Costa; Thiago D Corrêa; Dieter E S Araya; Marcelo O Maia; Marcus A Ferez; Alexandre G R Carvalho; Marcos F Knibel; Ulisses O Melo; Marcelo S Santino; Thiago Lisboa; Eliana B Caser; Bruno A M P Besen; Fernando A Bozza; Derek C Angus; Marcio Soares
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2019-10-08       Impact factor: 17.440

8.  Toward the Ideal Ratio of Patients to Intensivists: Finding a Reasonable Balance.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Viglianti; Theodore J Iwashyna
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  Does Unprecedented ICU Capacity Strain, As Experienced During the COVID-19 Pandemic, Impact Patient Outcome?

Authors:  M Elizabeth Wilcox; Kathryn M Rowan; David A Harrison; James C Doidge
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2022-02-16       Impact factor: 9.296

10.  Targeted Minimal Staff-to-Patient Ratios Are Unachievable - A Nationwide Survey in German ICUs During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Clemens Grimm; Steffen Dickel; Alexandra Sachkova; Maria Popp; Martin Golinksi; Falk Fichtner; Peter Kranke; Christian Seeber; Sven Laudi; Sebastian Voigt-Radloff; Onnen Moerer
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-06-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.