Aaron S Case, Chad H Hochberg, Binu Koirala, Eleni Flanagan, Souvik Chatterjee, William N Checkley, Ayse P Gurses, David N Hager
{"title":"单一医疗保健系统中中间护理组织的异质性。","authors":"Aaron S Case, Chad H Hochberg, Binu Koirala, Eleni Flanagan, Souvik Chatterjee, William N Checkley, Ayse P Gurses, David N Hager","doi":"10.1097/CCE.0000000000001201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intermediate care (IC) is prevalent nationwide, but little is known about how to best organize this level of care. Using a 99-item cross-sectional survey assessing four domains (hospital and physical IC features, provider and nurse staffing, monitoring, and interventions/services), we describe the organizational heterogeneity of IC within a five-hospital healthcare system. Surveys were completed by nurse managers from 12 (86%) of 14 IC settings. Six IC settings (50%) were embedded within acute care wards, four (33%) were stand-alone units, and two (17%) were embedded within an ICU. All had a nurse-to-patient ratio of 1:3, provided continuous cardiac telemetry, continuous pulse oximetry, high-flow nasal oxygen, and bedside intermittent hemodialysis. Most (> 50%) permitted arterial lines, frequent nursing assessments (every 2 hr), and noninvasive ventilation or mechanical ventilation via a tracheostomy. Vasopressors were less often permitted (< 25% of settings). Models of IC vary greatly within a single healthcare system.</p>","PeriodicalId":93957,"journal":{"name":"Critical care explorations","volume":"7 1","pages":"e1201"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Heterogeneity of Intermediate Care Organization Within a Single Healthcare System.\",\"authors\":\"Aaron S Case, Chad H Hochberg, Binu Koirala, Eleni Flanagan, Souvik Chatterjee, William N Checkley, Ayse P Gurses, David N Hager\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CCE.0000000000001201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Intermediate care (IC) is prevalent nationwide, but little is known about how to best organize this level of care. Using a 99-item cross-sectional survey assessing four domains (hospital and physical IC features, provider and nurse staffing, monitoring, and interventions/services), we describe the organizational heterogeneity of IC within a five-hospital healthcare system. Surveys were completed by nurse managers from 12 (86%) of 14 IC settings. Six IC settings (50%) were embedded within acute care wards, four (33%) were stand-alone units, and two (17%) were embedded within an ICU. All had a nurse-to-patient ratio of 1:3, provided continuous cardiac telemetry, continuous pulse oximetry, high-flow nasal oxygen, and bedside intermittent hemodialysis. Most (> 50%) permitted arterial lines, frequent nursing assessments (every 2 hr), and noninvasive ventilation or mechanical ventilation via a tracheostomy. Vasopressors were less often permitted (< 25% of settings). Models of IC vary greatly within a single healthcare system.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93957,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical care explorations\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"e1201\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical care explorations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000001201\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care explorations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000001201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Heterogeneity of Intermediate Care Organization Within a Single Healthcare System.
Intermediate care (IC) is prevalent nationwide, but little is known about how to best organize this level of care. Using a 99-item cross-sectional survey assessing four domains (hospital and physical IC features, provider and nurse staffing, monitoring, and interventions/services), we describe the organizational heterogeneity of IC within a five-hospital healthcare system. Surveys were completed by nurse managers from 12 (86%) of 14 IC settings. Six IC settings (50%) were embedded within acute care wards, four (33%) were stand-alone units, and two (17%) were embedded within an ICU. All had a nurse-to-patient ratio of 1:3, provided continuous cardiac telemetry, continuous pulse oximetry, high-flow nasal oxygen, and bedside intermittent hemodialysis. Most (> 50%) permitted arterial lines, frequent nursing assessments (every 2 hr), and noninvasive ventilation or mechanical ventilation via a tracheostomy. Vasopressors were less often permitted (< 25% of settings). Models of IC vary greatly within a single healthcare system.