模拟精神病重症监护病房的住院时间。

IF 4.1 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Stephen Dye, Faisil Sethi, Thomas Kearney, Elizabeth Rose, Leia Penfold, Malcolm Campbell, Koravangattu Valsraj
{"title":"模拟精神病重症监护病房的住院时间。","authors":"Stephen Dye,&nbsp;Faisil Sethi,&nbsp;Thomas Kearney,&nbsp;Elizabeth Rose,&nbsp;Leia Penfold,&nbsp;Malcolm Campbell,&nbsp;Koravangattu Valsraj","doi":"10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To examine whether discharge destination is a useful predictor variable for the length of admission within psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A clinician-led process separated PICU admissions by discharge destination into three types and suggested other possible variables associated with length of stay. Subsequently, a retrospective study gathered proposed predictor variable data from a total of 368 admissions from four PICUs. Bayesian models were developed and analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinical patient-type grouping by discharge destination displayed better intraclass correlation (0.37) than any other predictor variable (next highest was the specific PICU to which a patient was admitted (0.0585)). Patients who were transferred to further secure care had the longest PICU admission length. The best model included both patient type (discharge destination) and unit as well as an interaction between those variables.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Patient typing based on clinical pathways shows better predictive ability of admission length than clinical diagnosis or a specific tool that was developed to identify patient needs. Modelling admission lengths in a Bayesian fashion could be expanded and be useful within service planning and monitoring for groups of patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Variables previously proposed to be associated with patient need did not predict PICU admission length. Of the proposed predictor variables, grouping patients by discharge destination contributed the most to length of stay in four different PICUs.</p>","PeriodicalId":9050,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/14/47/bmjhci-2022-100685.PMC10040048.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modelling admission lengths within psychiatric intensive care units.\",\"authors\":\"Stephen Dye,&nbsp;Faisil Sethi,&nbsp;Thomas Kearney,&nbsp;Elizabeth Rose,&nbsp;Leia Penfold,&nbsp;Malcolm Campbell,&nbsp;Koravangattu Valsraj\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100685\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To examine whether discharge destination is a useful predictor variable for the length of admission within psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A clinician-led process separated PICU admissions by discharge destination into three types and suggested other possible variables associated with length of stay. Subsequently, a retrospective study gathered proposed predictor variable data from a total of 368 admissions from four PICUs. Bayesian models were developed and analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinical patient-type grouping by discharge destination displayed better intraclass correlation (0.37) than any other predictor variable (next highest was the specific PICU to which a patient was admitted (0.0585)). Patients who were transferred to further secure care had the longest PICU admission length. The best model included both patient type (discharge destination) and unit as well as an interaction between those variables.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Patient typing based on clinical pathways shows better predictive ability of admission length than clinical diagnosis or a specific tool that was developed to identify patient needs. Modelling admission lengths in a Bayesian fashion could be expanded and be useful within service planning and monitoring for groups of patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Variables previously proposed to be associated with patient need did not predict PICU admission length. Of the proposed predictor variables, grouping patients by discharge destination contributed the most to length of stay in four different PICUs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Health & Care Informatics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/14/47/bmjhci-2022-100685.PMC10040048.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Health & Care Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100685\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100685","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究出院目的地是否是精神科重症监护病房(picu)住院时间的一个有用的预测变量。方法:临床主导的流程将PICU入院按出院目的地分为三种类型,并提出与住院时间相关的其他可能变量。随后,一项回顾性研究收集了来自4个picu的368例入院患者的预测变量数据。建立并分析了贝叶斯模型。结果:按出院目的地进行临床患者类型分组比其他任何预测变量具有更好的类内相关性(0.37)(第二高的是患者入住的特定PICU(0.0585))。转入进一步安全护理的患者PICU住院时间最长。最佳模型包括患者类型(出院目的地)和单位以及这些变量之间的相互作用。讨论:基于临床路径的患者分型比临床诊断或开发用于识别患者需求的特定工具对住院时间的预测能力更好。以贝叶斯方式建模住院长度可以扩展,并在服务规划和监测患者群体中有用。结论:先前提出的与患者需求相关的变量不能预测PICU住院时间。在提出的预测变量中,按出院目的地分组患者对四种不同picu的住院时间贡献最大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Modelling admission lengths within psychiatric intensive care units.

Modelling admission lengths within psychiatric intensive care units.

Modelling admission lengths within psychiatric intensive care units.

Objectives: To examine whether discharge destination is a useful predictor variable for the length of admission within psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs).

Methods: A clinician-led process separated PICU admissions by discharge destination into three types and suggested other possible variables associated with length of stay. Subsequently, a retrospective study gathered proposed predictor variable data from a total of 368 admissions from four PICUs. Bayesian models were developed and analysed.

Results: Clinical patient-type grouping by discharge destination displayed better intraclass correlation (0.37) than any other predictor variable (next highest was the specific PICU to which a patient was admitted (0.0585)). Patients who were transferred to further secure care had the longest PICU admission length. The best model included both patient type (discharge destination) and unit as well as an interaction between those variables.

Discussion: Patient typing based on clinical pathways shows better predictive ability of admission length than clinical diagnosis or a specific tool that was developed to identify patient needs. Modelling admission lengths in a Bayesian fashion could be expanded and be useful within service planning and monitoring for groups of patients.

Conclusion: Variables previously proposed to be associated with patient need did not predict PICU admission length. Of the proposed predictor variables, grouping patients by discharge destination contributed the most to length of stay in four different PICUs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.90%
发文量
40
审稿时长
18 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