Unit-to-unit transfer due to shortage of intensive care beds in Sweden 2015-2019 was associated with a lower risk of death but a longer intensive care stay compared to no transfer: a registry study.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Christian Rylander, Jesper Sternley, Max Petzold, Jonatan Oras
{"title":"Unit-to-unit transfer due to shortage of intensive care beds in Sweden 2015-2019 was associated with a lower risk of death but a longer intensive care stay compared to no transfer: a registry study.","authors":"Christian Rylander, Jesper Sternley, Max Petzold, Jonatan Oras","doi":"10.1186/s40560-024-00722-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intensive care unit-to-unit transfer due to temporary shortage of beds is increasing in Sweden. Transportation induces practical hazards, and the change of health care provider may prolong the length of stay in intensive care. We previously showed that the risk of death at 90 days did not differ between patients transferred due to a shortage of beds and non-transferred patients with a similar burden of illness in a tertiary intensive care unit. The aim of this study was to widen the analysis to a nation-wide cohort of critically ill patients transferred to another intensive care unit in Sweden due to shortage of intensive care beds.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective comparison between capacity transferred and non-transferred patients, based on data from the Swedish Intensive Care Registry during a 5-year period before the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with insufficient data entries or a recurring capacity transfer within 90 days were excluded. To assess the association between capacity transfer and death as well as intensive care stay within 90 days after ICU admission, logistic regression models with step-wise adjustment for SAPS3 score, primary ICD-10 ICU diagnosis and the number of days in the intensive care unit before transfer were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 161,140 eligible intensive care admissions, 2912 capacity transfers were compared to 135,641 discharges or deaths in the intensive care unit. Ninety days after ICU admission, 28% of transferred and 21% of non-transferred patients were deceased. In the fully adjusted model, capacity transfer was associated with a lower risk of death within 90 days than no transfer; OR (95% CI) 0.71 (0.65-0.69) and the number of days spent in intensive care was longer: 12.4 [95% CI 12.2-12.5] vs 3.3 [3.3-3.3].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intensive care unit-to-unit transfer due to shortage of bed capacity as compared to no transfer during a 5-year period preceding the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden was associated with lower risk of death within 90 days but with longer stay in intensive care.</p>","PeriodicalId":16123,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intensive Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10898117/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40560-024-00722-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Intensive care unit-to-unit transfer due to temporary shortage of beds is increasing in Sweden. Transportation induces practical hazards, and the change of health care provider may prolong the length of stay in intensive care. We previously showed that the risk of death at 90 days did not differ between patients transferred due to a shortage of beds and non-transferred patients with a similar burden of illness in a tertiary intensive care unit. The aim of this study was to widen the analysis to a nation-wide cohort of critically ill patients transferred to another intensive care unit in Sweden due to shortage of intensive care beds.

Methods: Retrospective comparison between capacity transferred and non-transferred patients, based on data from the Swedish Intensive Care Registry during a 5-year period before the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with insufficient data entries or a recurring capacity transfer within 90 days were excluded. To assess the association between capacity transfer and death as well as intensive care stay within 90 days after ICU admission, logistic regression models with step-wise adjustment for SAPS3 score, primary ICD-10 ICU diagnosis and the number of days in the intensive care unit before transfer were applied.

Results: From 161,140 eligible intensive care admissions, 2912 capacity transfers were compared to 135,641 discharges or deaths in the intensive care unit. Ninety days after ICU admission, 28% of transferred and 21% of non-transferred patients were deceased. In the fully adjusted model, capacity transfer was associated with a lower risk of death within 90 days than no transfer; OR (95% CI) 0.71 (0.65-0.69) and the number of days spent in intensive care was longer: 12.4 [95% CI 12.2-12.5] vs 3.3 [3.3-3.3].

Conclusions: Intensive care unit-to-unit transfer due to shortage of bed capacity as compared to no transfer during a 5-year period preceding the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden was associated with lower risk of death within 90 days but with longer stay in intensive care.

瑞典 2015-2019 年因重症监护床位短缺而进行的病房间转运与未进行转运相比,死亡风险较低,但重症监护住院时间较长:一项登记研究。
背景:在瑞典,由于床位暂时短缺而导致的重症监护病房之间的转院现象日益增多。转院会带来实际风险,而更换医疗服务提供者可能会延长重症监护室的住院时间。我们之前的研究表明,在三级重症监护病房中,因床位短缺而转院的患者和未转院的患者在病情相似的情况下,90 天后的死亡风险并无差别。本研究的目的是将分析范围扩大到瑞典全国范围内因重症监护床位短缺而转至其他重症监护病房的重症患者:方法:根据瑞典重症监护登记处在 COVID-19 大流行前 5 年期间的数据,对转院患者和非转院患者的容量进行回顾性比较。数据输入不足或在 90 天内再次发生容量转移的患者被排除在外。为了评估转院与死亡以及入住重症监护室后90天内重症监护室住院时间之间的关系,采用了逻辑回归模型,并对SAPS3评分、ICD-10重症监护室主要诊断以及转院前在重症监护室的天数进行了逐步调整:在 161140 例符合条件的重症监护入院患者中,有 2912 例转院患者与 135641 例出院患者或重症监护室死亡患者进行了比较。在入住重症监护室九十天后,28%的转院患者和 21% 的非转院患者死亡。在完全调整模型中,与未转院相比,转院患者在90天内的死亡风险更低;OR(95% CI)为0.71(0.65-0.69),在重症监护室度过的天数更长:12.4 [95% CI 12.2-12.5] vs 3.3 [3.3-3.3]:结论:在瑞典COVID-19大流行之前的5年中,因床位不足而进行的重症监护病房间转院与不转院相比,90天内死亡风险较低,但重症监护时间较长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Intensive Care
Journal of Intensive Care Medicine-Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
11.90
自引率
1.40%
发文量
51
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: "Journal of Intensive Care" is an open access journal dedicated to the comprehensive coverage of intensive care medicine, providing a platform for the latest research and clinical insights in this critical field. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including intensive and critical care, trauma and surgical intensive care, pediatric intensive care, acute and emergency medicine, perioperative medicine, resuscitation, infection control, and organ dysfunction. Recognizing the importance of cultural diversity in healthcare practices, "Journal of Intensive Care" also encourages submissions that explore and discuss the cultural aspects of intensive care, aiming to promote a more inclusive and culturally sensitive approach to patient care. By fostering a global exchange of knowledge and expertise, the journal contributes to the continuous improvement of intensive care practices worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信