An open intensive care unit (ICU) model is a viable option for the acute expansion of ICU capacity in the state sector: A study of a needs-based strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary ICU in South Africa.

Q3 Medicine
E S Gwala, A Ramkillawan, M T D Smith
{"title":"An open intensive care unit (ICU) model is a viable option for the acute expansion of ICU capacity in the state sector: A study of a needs-based strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary ICU in South Africa.","authors":"E S Gwala, A Ramkillawan, M T D Smith","doi":"10.7196/AJTCCM.2025.v31i1.2004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Both open and closed intensive care unit (ICU) models are used in South Africa (SA). The literature is unclear with regard to which model is superior. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a critical care resource crisis that necessitated expansion of critical care capacity, often beyond the resources required to meet the structure of a closed ICU in the institutions using that model.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of non-COVID patients in a closed ICU setting and a temporary open unit that ran parallel to it during the pandemic, in order to assess this type of resource expansion as a viable option.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from the Intensive Care Electronic Record System in the Greys Hospital ICU in Pietermaritzburg, SA, were analysed for patients aged ≥12 years admitted to either the open or the closed ICU between April and August 2020. Data missing from the database were completed by referring to the medical records office. The primary outcome assessed was mortality, while secondary outcomes included adverse events and hospital length of stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant mortality difference between the ICU components (16.9% in the open-model group v. 15.1% in the closed model group; p=0.769). The incidence of adverse events also did not differ (45.5% in the open model v. 38.9% in the closed model; p=0.357).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients requiring ICU admission have complex conditions or have undergone extensive surgery, necessitating specialised treatment and careful monitoring. In the event of an acute surge event, expanding ICU capacity by adding an open-model component in a setting that traditionally runs closed models may be an effective strategy to assist in the management of critically ill patients without significantly affecting outcomes.</p><p><strong>Study synopsis: </strong><b>What the study adds.</b> This retrospective study compared outcomes of non-COVID patients in a closed intensive care unit (ICU) v. a temporary open unit during the pandemic. The efficacy of open v. closed ICU models remains uncertain in the South African context. The study offers insights into the effectiveness of open and closed ICU models, particularly in the context of crises during which institutions may face a critical care resource shortage.<b>Implications of the findings.</b> The study suggests that incorporating open ICU units during crises can manage patient surges effectively without compromising outcomes. It contributes to the existing literature by providing practical implications for resource management, clinical practice and future research, ensuring quality patient care while optimising critical care capacity.</p>","PeriodicalId":52847,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine","volume":"31 1","pages":"e2004"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12009499/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7196/AJTCCM.2025.v31i1.2004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Both open and closed intensive care unit (ICU) models are used in South Africa (SA). The literature is unclear with regard to which model is superior. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a critical care resource crisis that necessitated expansion of critical care capacity, often beyond the resources required to meet the structure of a closed ICU in the institutions using that model.

Objectives: This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of non-COVID patients in a closed ICU setting and a temporary open unit that ran parallel to it during the pandemic, in order to assess this type of resource expansion as a viable option.

Methods: Data from the Intensive Care Electronic Record System in the Greys Hospital ICU in Pietermaritzburg, SA, were analysed for patients aged ≥12 years admitted to either the open or the closed ICU between April and August 2020. Data missing from the database were completed by referring to the medical records office. The primary outcome assessed was mortality, while secondary outcomes included adverse events and hospital length of stay.

Results: There was no significant mortality difference between the ICU components (16.9% in the open-model group v. 15.1% in the closed model group; p=0.769). The incidence of adverse events also did not differ (45.5% in the open model v. 38.9% in the closed model; p=0.357).

Conclusion: Patients requiring ICU admission have complex conditions or have undergone extensive surgery, necessitating specialised treatment and careful monitoring. In the event of an acute surge event, expanding ICU capacity by adding an open-model component in a setting that traditionally runs closed models may be an effective strategy to assist in the management of critically ill patients without significantly affecting outcomes.

Study synopsis: What the study adds. This retrospective study compared outcomes of non-COVID patients in a closed intensive care unit (ICU) v. a temporary open unit during the pandemic. The efficacy of open v. closed ICU models remains uncertain in the South African context. The study offers insights into the effectiveness of open and closed ICU models, particularly in the context of crises during which institutions may face a critical care resource shortage.Implications of the findings. The study suggests that incorporating open ICU units during crises can manage patient surges effectively without compromising outcomes. It contributes to the existing literature by providing practical implications for resource management, clinical practice and future research, ensuring quality patient care while optimising critical care capacity.

开放式重症监护室(ICU)模式是国有部门重症监护室能力急剧扩大的可行选择:对南非第三重症监护室COVID-19大流行期间基于需求的战略的研究。
背景:南非(SA)采用开放式和封闭式重症监护病房(ICU)模式。文献不清楚哪种模型更优。2019冠状病毒病大流行导致重症监护资源危机,需要扩大重症监护能力,往往超出了使用该模式的机构满足封闭ICU结构所需的资源。目的:本回顾性研究旨在比较大流行期间非covid患者在封闭ICU环境和与之并行的临时开放病房的结果,以评估这种类型的资源扩展是一种可行的选择。方法:分析2020年4月至8月期间在SA Pietermaritzburg的Greys医院ICU重症监护电子记录系统中收治的≥12岁的开放或封闭ICU患者的数据。数据库中缺失的数据通过参考医疗记录办公室来完成。评估的主要结局是死亡率,而次要结局包括不良事件和住院时间。结果:ICU各组件死亡率差异无统计学意义(开放模型组16.9% vs封闭模型组15.1%;p = 0.769)。不良事件发生率也无差异(开放组为45.5%,封闭组为38.9%;p = 0.357)。结论:需要ICU住院的患者病情复杂或手术范围大,需要专科治疗和严密监护。在发生急性激增事件时,通过在传统上运行封闭模式的环境中增加开放模式组件来扩大ICU容量可能是一种有效的策略,可以在不显著影响结果的情况下协助管理危重患者。研究简介:研究补充了什么。本回顾性研究比较了大流行期间非covid患者在封闭重症监护病房(ICU)和临时开放病房的结果。在南非的情况下,开放式与封闭式ICU模式的疗效仍然不确定。该研究为开放式和封闭式ICU模式的有效性提供了见解,特别是在机构可能面临重症护理资源短缺的危机背景下。研究结果的含义。该研究表明,在危机期间合并开放式ICU病房可以有效地管理患者激增,而不会影响结果。它通过为资源管理、临床实践和未来研究提供实际意义,确保高质量的患者护理,同时优化重症护理能力,为现有文献做出了贡献。
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
African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine
African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine Medicine-Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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