Literature DB >> 32028993

New-onset atrial fibrillation can be falsely associated with increased length of stay in ICU due to immortal time bias.

Yifang Lu1, Tenggao Chen2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32028993      PMCID: PMC7006403          DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-2757-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care        ISSN: 1364-8535            Impact factor:   9.097


× No keyword cloud information.
Dear editor, In a recent study published in Critical Care, Fernando SM and colleagues investigated the impact of new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients [1]. They performed univariate analysis and found that the length of stays (LOS) in ICU and hospital was both longer in the NOAF group versus non-NOAF group. They then concluded that NOAF was associated with increased LOS in ICU and increased total costs. While the conclusion appeared intuitive and statistically sound, it could be the result of immortal time bias. Immortal time is a span of cohort follow-up during which, because of exposure definition, the outcome under study could not occur [2]. The NOAF can happen at any time during ICU stay and patients live longer in the ICU can have more chance to report NOAF. For example, a patient can have NOAF on day 4 and the outcome such as ICU discharge or death cannot happen before day 4. In this situation, the period from days 1 to 3 are considered as immortal time because if the outcome happens during the period, the patient cannot experience NOAF. The immortal time is incorrectly attributed to the exposure of NOAF, but actually, the NOAF do not contribute to the survival time. The same applies to the mortality outcome. The authors used binary logistic regression model to adjust for confounding effect and found there was no independent association of NOAF and mortality [3]. The truth could be that NOAF is associated with increased mortality risk, but since patients who lived longer can have more chances to experience NOAF, the neural effect reported in the paper was actually the result of the true adverse effect and the bias towards beneficial effect. Potential solutions to control for the immortal time bias are as follows: (1) perform analysis by restricting to patients who had NOAF on day 1 and compare to those without NOAF, (2) consider the time of NOAF and include NOAF as time-varying covariate in the Cox proportional hazard model [4], and (3) perform time-dependent propensity score matching by including covariates that can influence the onset of NOAF [5]. The authors would like to thank Drs. Lu and Chen for their comments on our recent article related to outcomes and costs associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in critically ill adults [1]. Drs. Lu and Chen suggest caution in the interpretation of our study results, particularly as they relate to the length of stay and costs, due to the possibility of immortal time bias. Indeed, the use of time-dependent covariates (such as NOAF) has the potential to confound multivariate models [2]. However, as seen in our original study, the majority of patients who developed NOAF did so on the first day of hospital admission, consistent with previous studies in this population [6, 7]. As suggested by Drs. Lu and Chen, we conducted sensitivity analyses of our data, restricting the NOAF population to only those who developed NOAF on the first day of hospital admission (n = 962, 62.4% of the original NOAF population). Indeed, our original results persist, with patients with developing NOAF on the first day of admission still experiencing prolonged hospital stay, as compared to patients who did not develop NOAF (Table 1). We similarly repeated our generalized linear model restricted to this select population, in order to determine if NOAF was still associated with total hospital costs (Table 2). We found that NOAF was indeed a predictor of total hospital costs, even when only considering patients who developed NOAF on the first day of admission. These findings support the notion that our results were not markedly influenced by immortal time bias.
Table 1

Outcomes of ICU patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) on the first day of admission and those without NOAF

CharacteristicNew-onset atrial fibrillation on day 1 (n = 962)No atrial fibrillation (n = 13,473)Adjusted odds ratioc (95% CI)P value
In-hospital mortality, n (%)367 (38.1)4034 (29.9)1.03 (0.95–1.11)0.34
Persistent atrial fibrillation, n (%)b238 (24.7)
ICU length of stay, days, median (IQR)7 (2–14)6 (2–9)< 0.01
Hospital length of stay, days, median (IQR)14 (6–27)12 (4–25)< 0.001
Ventilator-free days, median (IQR)6 (2–8)6 (4–10)0.08

Abbreviations: ICU intensive care unit, IQR interquartile range

aOnly includes patients surviving to discharge

bDefined as the presence of any atrial fibrillation following 24 h of treatment

cRatio of NOAF to patients with no atrial fibrillation

Table 2

Generalized linear model with gamma distribution and log link for the total cost for patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) on the first day or admission and those without NOAF (n = 14,435)

VariableCost ratio95% CIP value
Age (per 5 years)0.960.90–1.030.07
Male gender1.010.88–1.120.17
New-onset atrial fibrillation1.081.02–1.19< 0.01
MODS (per 1 point)0.960.91–0.98< 0.01
Comorbidities
 Congestive heart failure0.960.87–1.060.35
 Peripheral vascular disease1.050.97–1.130.22
 Hypertension1.020.92–1.090.66
 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease0.950.88–1.120.59
 Diabetes mellitus1.020.92–1.110.47
 Chronic kidney disease0.980.81–1.210.42
 Liver disease0.910.77–1.080.31
 Alcohol misuse1.020.95–1.080.77
Elixhauser comorbidity score (per 1 point)0.990.90–1.070.53
No CPR directive at ICU admission0.820.70–0.92< 0.001
Location prior to ICU admission
 Emergency departmentRef
 Hospital wards1.040.87–1.200.51
 Operating room1.090.99–1.290.06
 Peripheral hospital0.930.79–1.060.11
Most responsible diagnosis
 OtherRef
 Infection/sepsis1.060.89–1.200.45
 Respiratory failure1.911.29–2.41< 0.001
 Trauma1.491.15–1.88< 0.001
 Malignancy0.940.79–1.100.38
 Spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage2.191.71–2.60< 0.001
 Stroke1.141.01–1.280.04
 Overdose/poisoning0.880.80–0.96< 0.01
 Renal failure0.830.66–0.93< 0.001
 Gastrointestinal bleeding1.120.97–1.200.10
 Congestive heart failure1.060.95–1.150.39
 Cardiac arrest1.130.89–1.230.68
 Seizures/status epilepticus1.191.01–1.400.03
 Diabetic ketoacidosis0.730.61–0.83< 0.001
In-hospital death0.630.56–0.69< 0.001
Length of stay (per 1 day)1.031.02–1.05< 0.01
Invasive mechanical ventilation1.251.16–1.35< 0.001
Renal replacement therapy1.091.02–1.14< 0.01

Abbreviations: MODS Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score, ICU intensive care unit, CI confidence interval, CPR cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Outcomes of ICU patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) on the first day of admission and those without NOAF Abbreviations: ICU intensive care unit, IQR interquartile range aOnly includes patients surviving to discharge bDefined as the presence of any atrial fibrillation following 24 h of treatment cRatio of NOAF to patients with no atrial fibrillation Generalized linear model with gamma distribution and log link for the total cost for patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) on the first day or admission and those without NOAF (n = 14,435) Abbreviations: MODS Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score, ICU intensive care unit, CI confidence interval, CPR cardiopulmonary resuscitation Finally, we would like to clarify that total hospital costs are not inferred as a multiple of hospital length of stay, as Drs. Lu and Chen suggest. In fact, all direct costs are linked directly to the patient identification number, and while they may be associated with length of stay (e.g., a person who stays in hospital for a longer length of time is likely to have increased testing and therapies, translating to higher costs), they are not obtained through a multiplication of length of stay, but rather reflect the direct resource use for each individual patient [8].
  8 in total

1.  Propensity score matching with time-dependent covariates.

Authors:  Bo Lu
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Outcomes and Costs of Patients Admitted to the ICU Due to Spontaneous Intracranial Hemorrhage.

Authors:  Shannon M Fernando; Peter M Reardon; Dar Dowlatshahi; Shane W English; Kednapa Thavorn; Peter Tanuseputro; Jeffrey J Perry; Erin Rosenberg; Eelco F Wijdicks; Daren K Heyland; Kwadwo Kyeremanteng
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 7.598

3.  Problem of immortal time bias in cohort studies: example using statins for preventing progression of diabetes.

Authors:  Linda E Lévesque; James A Hanley; Abbas Kezouh; Samy Suissa
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-12

Review 4.  New-onset atrial fibrillation in adult critically ill patients: a scoping review.

Authors:  Mik Wetterslev; Nicolai Haase; Christian Hassager; Emilie P Belley-Cote; William F McIntyre; Youzhong An; Jiawei Shen; Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti; Fernando G Zampieri; Helio Penna Guimaraes; Anders Granholm; Anders Perner; Morten Hylander Møller
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Time-varying covariates and coefficients in Cox regression models.

Authors:  Zhongheng Zhang; Jaakko Reinikainen; Kazeem Adedayo Adeleke; Marcel E Pieterse; Catharina G M Groothuis-Oudshoorn
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-04

6.  Model building strategy for logistic regression: purposeful selection.

Authors:  Zhongheng Zhang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-03

7.  New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in the Critically Ill.

Authors:  Travis J Moss; James Forrest Calland; Kyle B Enfield; Diana C Gomez-Manjarres; Caroline Ruminski; John P DiMarco; Douglas E Lake; J Randall Moorman
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  New-onset atrial fibrillation and associated outcomes and resource use among critically ill adults-a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Shannon M Fernando; Rebecca Mathew; Benjamin Hibbert; Bram Rochwerg; Laveena Munshi; Allan J Walkey; Morten Hylander Møller; Trevor Simard; Pietro Di Santo; F Daniel Ramirez; Peter Tanuseputro; Kwadwo Kyeremanteng
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2020-01-13       Impact factor: 9.097

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.