Pooja N Pandit, Mark Mallozzi, Rahed Mohammed, Gregory McDonough, Taylor Treacy, Nathaniel Zahustecher, Erika J Yoo
{"title":"医学重症监护室短期住院病人的回顾性队列研究:确定患者特征和重症监护资源利用情况。","authors":"Pooja N Pandit, Mark Mallozzi, Rahed Mohammed, Gregory McDonough, Taylor Treacy, Nathaniel Zahustecher, Erika J Yoo","doi":"10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_6_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Little is known about the mortality and utilization outcomes of short-stay intensive care unit (ICU) patients who require <24 h of critical care. We aimed to define characteristics and outcomes of short-stay ICU patients whose need for ICU level-of-care is ≤24 h compared to nonshort-stay patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Single-center retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the medical ICU at an academic tertiary care center in 2019. Fisher's exact test or Chi-square for descriptive categorical variables, <i>t</i>-test for continuous variables, and Mann-Whitney two-sample test for length of stay (LOS) outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 819 patients, 206 (25.2%) were short-stay compared to 613 (74.8%) nonshort-stay. The severity of illness as measured by the Mortality Probability Model-III was significantly lower among short-stay compared to nonshort-stay patients (<i>P</i> = 0.0001). Most short-stay patients were admitted for hemodynamic monitoring not requiring vasoactive medications (77, 37.4%). Thirty-six (17.5%) of the short-stay cohort met Society of Critical Care Medicine's guidelines for ICU admission. Nonfull-ICU LOS, or time spent waiting for transfer out to a non-ICU bed, was similar between the two groups. Hospital mortality was lower among short-stay patients compared to nonshort-stay patients (<i>P</i> = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite their lower illness severity and fewer ICU-level care needs, short-stay patients spend an equally substantial amount of time occupying an ICU bed while waiting for a floor bed as nonshort-stay patients. Further investigation into the factors influencing ICU triage of these subacute patients and contributors to system inefficiencies prohibiting their timely transfer may improve ICU resource allocation, hospital throughput, and patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":13938,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science","volume":"12 3","pages":"127-132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9728074/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A retrospective cohort study of short-stay admissions to the medical intensive care unit: Defining patient characteristics and critical care resource utilization.\",\"authors\":\"Pooja N Pandit, Mark Mallozzi, Rahed Mohammed, Gregory McDonough, Taylor Treacy, Nathaniel Zahustecher, Erika J Yoo\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_6_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Little is known about the mortality and utilization outcomes of short-stay intensive care unit (ICU) patients who require <24 h of critical care. We aimed to define characteristics and outcomes of short-stay ICU patients whose need for ICU level-of-care is ≤24 h compared to nonshort-stay patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Single-center retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the medical ICU at an academic tertiary care center in 2019. Fisher's exact test or Chi-square for descriptive categorical variables, <i>t</i>-test for continuous variables, and Mann-Whitney two-sample test for length of stay (LOS) outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 819 patients, 206 (25.2%) were short-stay compared to 613 (74.8%) nonshort-stay. The severity of illness as measured by the Mortality Probability Model-III was significantly lower among short-stay compared to nonshort-stay patients (<i>P</i> = 0.0001). Most short-stay patients were admitted for hemodynamic monitoring not requiring vasoactive medications (77, 37.4%). Thirty-six (17.5%) of the short-stay cohort met Society of Critical Care Medicine's guidelines for ICU admission. Nonfull-ICU LOS, or time spent waiting for transfer out to a non-ICU bed, was similar between the two groups. Hospital mortality was lower among short-stay patients compared to nonshort-stay patients (<i>P</i> = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite their lower illness severity and fewer ICU-level care needs, short-stay patients spend an equally substantial amount of time occupying an ICU bed while waiting for a floor bed as nonshort-stay patients. Further investigation into the factors influencing ICU triage of these subacute patients and contributors to system inefficiencies prohibiting their timely transfer may improve ICU resource allocation, hospital throughput, and patient outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13938,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science\",\"volume\":\"12 3\",\"pages\":\"127-132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9728074/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_6_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/9/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_6_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
A retrospective cohort study of short-stay admissions to the medical intensive care unit: Defining patient characteristics and critical care resource utilization.
Background: Little is known about the mortality and utilization outcomes of short-stay intensive care unit (ICU) patients who require <24 h of critical care. We aimed to define characteristics and outcomes of short-stay ICU patients whose need for ICU level-of-care is ≤24 h compared to nonshort-stay patients.
Methods: Single-center retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the medical ICU at an academic tertiary care center in 2019. Fisher's exact test or Chi-square for descriptive categorical variables, t-test for continuous variables, and Mann-Whitney two-sample test for length of stay (LOS) outcomes.
Results: Of 819 patients, 206 (25.2%) were short-stay compared to 613 (74.8%) nonshort-stay. The severity of illness as measured by the Mortality Probability Model-III was significantly lower among short-stay compared to nonshort-stay patients (P = 0.0001). Most short-stay patients were admitted for hemodynamic monitoring not requiring vasoactive medications (77, 37.4%). Thirty-six (17.5%) of the short-stay cohort met Society of Critical Care Medicine's guidelines for ICU admission. Nonfull-ICU LOS, or time spent waiting for transfer out to a non-ICU bed, was similar between the two groups. Hospital mortality was lower among short-stay patients compared to nonshort-stay patients (P = 0.01).
Conclusions: Despite their lower illness severity and fewer ICU-level care needs, short-stay patients spend an equally substantial amount of time occupying an ICU bed while waiting for a floor bed as nonshort-stay patients. Further investigation into the factors influencing ICU triage of these subacute patients and contributors to system inefficiencies prohibiting their timely transfer may improve ICU resource allocation, hospital throughput, and patient outcomes.
期刊介绍:
IJCIIS encourages research, education and dissemination of knowledge in the field of Critical Illness and Injury Science across the world thus promoting translational research by striking a synergy between basic science, clinical medicine and public health. The Journal intends to bring together scientists and academicians in the emergency intensive care and promote translational synergy between Laboratory Science, Clinical Medicine and Public Health. The Journal invites Original Articles, Clinical Investigations, Epidemiological Analysis, Data Protocols, Case Reports, Clinical Photographs, review articles and special commentaries. Students, Residents, Academicians, Public Health experts and scientists are all encouraged to be a part of this initiative by contributing, reviewing and promoting scientific works and science.