RESUMO
PURPOSE: Parametric regression models have been the main statistical method for identifying average treatment effects. Causal machine learning models showed promising results in estimating heterogeneous treatment effects in causal inference. Here we aimed to compare the application of causal random forest (CRF) and linear regression modelling (LRM) to estimate the effects of organisational factors on ICU efficiency. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 277,459 patients admitted to 128 Brazilian and Uruguayan ICUs over three years. ICU efficiency was assessed using the average standardised efficiency ratio (ASER), measured as the average of the standardised mortality ratio (SMR) and the standardised resource use (SRU) according to the SAPS-3 score. Using a causal inference framework, we estimated and compared the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) of seven common structural and organisational factors on ICU efficiency using LRM with interaction terms and CRF. RESULTS: The hospital mortality was 14 %; median ICU and hospital lengths of stay were 2 and 7 days, respectively. Overall median SMR was 0.97 [IQR: 0.76,1.21], median SRU was 1.06 [IQR: 0.79,1.30] and median ASER was 0.99 [IQR: 0.82,1.21]. Both CRF and LRM showed that the average number of nurses per ten beds was independently associated with ICU efficiency (CATE [95 %CI]: -0.13 [-0.24, -0.01] and -0.09 [-0.17,-0.01], respectively). Finally, CRF identified some specific ICUs with a significant CATE in exposures that did not present a significant average effect. CONCLUSION: In general, both methods were comparable to identify organisational factors significantly associated with CATE on ICU efficiency. CRF however identified specific ICUs with significant effects, even when the average effect was nonsignificant. This can assist healthcare managers in further in-dept evaluation of process interventions to improve ICU efficiency.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Previously, we reported a decreased mortality rate among patients with COVID-19 who were admitted at the ICU during the final upsurge of the second wave (February-June 2021) in the Netherlands. We examined whether this decrease persisted during the third wave and the phases with decreasing incidence of COVID-19 thereafter and brought up to date the information on patient characteristics. METHODS: Data from the National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE)-registry of all COVID-19 patients admitted to an ICU in the Netherlands were used. Patient characteristics and rates of in-hospital mortality (the primary outcome) during the consecutive periods after the first wave (periods 2-9, May 25, 2020-January 31, 2023) were compared with those during the first wave (period 1, February-May 24, 2020). RESULTS: After adjustment for patient characteristics and ICU occupancy rate, the mortality risk during the initial upsurge of the third wave (period 6, October 5, 2021-January, 31, 2022) was similar to that of the first wave (ORadj = 1.01, 95%-CI [0.88-1.16]). The mortality rates thereafter decreased again (e.g., period 9, October 5, 2022-January, 31, 2023: ORadj = 0.52, 95%-CI [0.41-0.66]). Among the SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, there was a huge drop in the proportion of patients with COVID-19 as main reason for ICU admission: from 88.2% during the initial upsurge of the third wave to 51.7%, 37.3%, and 41.9% for the periods thereafter. Restricting the analysis to these patients did not modify the results on mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The results show variation in mortality rates among critically ill COVID-19 patients across the calendar time periods that is not explained by differences in case-mix and ICU occupancy rates or by varying proportions of patients with COVID-19 as main reason for ICU admission. The consistent increase in mortality during the initial, rising phase of each separate wave might be caused by the increased virulence of the contemporary virus strain and lacking immunity to the new strain, besides unmeasured patient-, treatment- and healthcare system characteristics.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To investigate the development in quality of ICU care over time using the Dutch National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) registry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included data from all ICU admissions in the Netherlands from those ICUs that submitted complete data between 2009 and 2021 to the NICE registry. We determined median and interquartile range for eight quality indicators. To evaluate changes over time on the indicators, we performed multilevel regression analyses, once without and once with the COVID-19 years 2020 and 2021 included. Additionally we explored between-ICU heterogeneity by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). RESULTS: 705,822 ICU admissions from 55 (65%) ICUs were included in the analyses. ICU length of stay (LOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), readmissions, in-hospital mortality, hypoglycemia, and pressure ulcers decreased significantly between 2009 and 2019 (OR <1). After including the COVID-19 pandemic years, the significant change in MV duration, ICU LOS, and pressure ulcers disappeared. We found an ICC ≤0.07 on the quality indicators for all years, except for pressure ulcers with an ICC of 0.27 for 2009 to 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of Dutch ICU care based on seven indicators significantly improved from 2009 to 2019 and between-ICU heterogeneity is medium to small, except for pressure ulcers. The COVID-19 pandemic disturbed the trend in quality improvement, but unaltered the between-ICU heterogeneity.