Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 131
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Crit Care Med ; 52(9): 1323-1332, 2024 Sep 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38713002

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes for 2 weeks vs. 1 week of maximal patient-intensivist continuity in the ICU. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Two U.S. urban, teaching, medical ICUs where intensivists were scheduled for 2-week service blocks: site A was in the Midwest and site B was in the Northeast. PATIENTS: Patients 18 years old or older admitted to a study ICU between March 1, 2017, and February 28, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We applied target trial emulation to compare admission during an intensivist's first week (as a proxy for 2 wk of maximal continuity) vs. admission during their second week (as a proxy for 1 wk of maximal continuity). Outcomes included hospital mortality, ICU length of stay, and, for mechanically ventilated patients, duration of ventilation. Exploratory outcomes included imaging, echocardiogram, and consultation orders. We used inverse probability weighting to adjust for baseline differences and random-effects meta-analysis to calculate overall effect estimates. Among 2571 patients, 1254 were admitted during an intensivist's first week and 1317 were admitted during a second week. At sites A and B, hospital mortality rates were 25.8% and 24.2%, median ICU length of stay were 4 and 2 days, and median mechanical ventilation durations were 3 and 3 days, respectively. There were no differences in adjusted mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.01 [95% CI, 0.96-1.06]) or ICU length of stay (-0.25 d [-0.82 d to +0.32 d]) for 2 weeks vs. 1 week of maximal continuity. Among mechanically ventilated patients, there were no differences in adjusted mortality (OR, 1.00 [0.87-1.16]), ICU length of stay (+0.06 d [-0.78 d to +0.91 d]), or duration of mechanical ventilation (+0.37 d [-0.46 d to +1.21 d]) for 2 weeks vs. 1 week of maximal continuity. CONCLUSIONS: Two weeks of maximal patient-intensivist continuity was not associated with differences in clinical outcomes compared with 1 week in two medical ICUs.


Asunto(s)
Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Tiempo de Internación , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/organización & administración , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Factores de Tiempo , Respiración Artificial/estadística & datos numéricos , Continuidad de la Atención al Paciente/organización & administración , Adulto
2.
Crit Care Med ; 48(5): 623-633, 2020 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32141923

RESUMEN

Prediction models aim to use available data to predict a health state or outcome that has not yet been observed. Prediction is primarily relevant to clinical practice, but is also used in research, and administration. While prediction modeling involves estimating the relationship between patient factors and outcomes, it is distinct from casual inference. Prediction modeling thus requires unique considerations for development, validation, and updating. This document represents an effort from editors at 31 respiratory, sleep, and critical care medicine journals to consolidate contemporary best practices and recommendations related to prediction study design, conduct, and reporting. Herein, we address issues commonly encountered in submissions to our various journals. Key topics include considerations for selecting predictor variables, operationalizing variables, dealing with missing data, the importance of appropriate validation, model performance measures and their interpretation, and good reporting practices. Supplemental discussion covers emerging topics such as model fairness, competing risks, pitfalls of "modifiable risk factors", measurement error, and risk for bias. This guidance is not meant to be overly prescriptive; we acknowledge that every study is different, and no set of rules will fit all cases. Additional best practices can be found in the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) guidelines, to which we refer readers for further details.


Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos/organización & administración , Modelos Estadísticos , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/normas , Enfermedades Respiratorias/epidemiología , Trastornos del Sueño-Vigilia/epidemiología , Sesgo , Cuidados Críticos/normas , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Humanos , Pronóstico , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados
3.
Med Care ; 57(4): 312-317, 2019 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30762722

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Medicaid expansion was associated with an increase in hospitalizations funded by Medicaid. Whether this increase reflects an isolated payer shift or broader changes in case-mix among hospitalized adults remains uncertain. RESEEARCH DESIGN: Difference-in-differences analysis of discharge data from 4 states that expanded Medicaid in 2014 (Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey, and Washington) and 3 comparison states that did not (North Carolina, Nebraska, and Wisconsin). SUBJECTS: All nonobstetric hospitalizations among patients aged 19-64 years of age admitted between January 2012 and December 2015. MEASURES: Outcomes included state-level per-capita rates of insurance coverage, several markers of admission severity, and admission diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 6,516,576 patients admitted during the study period. Per-capita admissions remained consistent in expansion and nonexpansion states, though Medicaid-covered admissions increased in expansion states (274.6-403.8 per 100,000 people vs. 268.9-262.8 per 100,000; P<0.001). There were no significant differences after Medicaid expansion in hospital utilization, based on per-capita rates of patients-designated emergent, admitted via the emergency department, admitted via clinic, discharged within 1 day, or with lengths of stay ≥7 days. Similarly, there were no differences in diagnosis category at admission, admission severity, comorbidity burden, or mortality associated with Medicaid expansion (P>0.05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion was associated with a shift in payers among nonelderly hospitalized adults without significant changes in case-mix or in several markers of acuity. These findings suggest that Medicaid expansion may reduce uncompensated care without shifting admissions practices or acuity among hospitalized adults.


Asunto(s)
Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Cobertura del Seguro/economía , Seguro de Salud/economía , Medicaid/estadística & datos numéricos , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Determinación de la Elegibilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Alta del Paciente , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos
4.
Crit Care Med ; 46(2): e158-e165, 2018 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29206766

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Acute renal replacement therapy in patients with sepsis has increased dramatically with substantial costs. However, the extent of variability in use across hospitals-and whether greater use is associated with better outcomes-is unknown. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Nationwide Inpatient Sample in 2011. PATIENTS: Eighteen years old and older with sepsis and acute kidney injury admitted to hospitals sampled by the Nationwide Inpatient Sample in 2011. INTERVENTIONS: We estimated the risk- and reliability-adjusted rate of acute renal replacement therapy use for patients with sepsis and acute kidney injury at each hospital. We examined the association between hospital-specific renal replacement therapy rate and in-hospital mortality and hospital costs after adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 293,899 hospitalizations with sepsis and acute kidney injury at 440 hospitals, of which 6.4% (n = 18,885) received renal replacement therapy. After risk and reliability adjustment, the median hospital renal replacement therapy rate for patients with sepsis and acute kidney injury was 3.6% (interquartile range, 2.9-4.5%). However, hospitals in the top quintile of renal replacement therapy use had rates ranging from 4.8% to 13.4%. There was no significant association between hospital-specific renal replacement therapy rate and in-hospital mortality (odds ratio per 1% increase in renal replacement therapy rate: 1.03; 95% CI, 0.99-1.07; p = 0.10). Hospital costs were significantly higher with increasing renal replacement therapy rates (absolute cost increase per 1% increase in renal replacement therapy rate: $1,316; 95% CI, $157-$2,475; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Use of renal replacement therapy in sepsis varied widely among nationally sampled hospitals without associated differences in mortality. Improving renal replacement standards for the initiation of therapy for sepsis may reduce healthcare costs without increasing mortality.


Asunto(s)
Lesión Renal Aguda/terapia , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Utilización de Procedimientos y Técnicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Terapia de Reemplazo Renal/estadística & datos numéricos , Sepsis/terapia , Lesión Renal Aguda/complicaciones , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia de Reemplazo Renal/economía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sepsis/etiología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos , Adulto Joven
5.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 195(3): 383-393, 2017 02 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28145766

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Studies of nighttime intensivist staffing have yielded mixed results. GOALS: To review the association of nighttime intensivist staffing with outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. METHODS: We searched five databases (2000-2016) for studies comparing in-hospital nighttime intensivist staffing with other nighttime staffing models in adult ICUs and reporting mortality or length of stay. We abstracted data on staffing models, outcomes, and study characteristics and assessed study quality, using standardized tools. Meta-analyses used random effects models. RESULTS: Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria: one randomized controlled trial and 17 observational studies. Overall methodologic quality was high. Studies included academic hospitals (n = 10), community hospitals (n = 2), or both (n = 6). Baseline clinician staffing included residents (n = 9), fellows (n = 4), and nurse practitioners or physician assistants (n = 2). Studies included both general and specialty ICUs and were geographically diverse. Meta-analysis (one randomized controlled trial; three nonrandomized studies with exposure limited to nighttime intensivist staffing with adjusted estimates of effect) demonstrated no association with mortality (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.29). Secondary analyses including studies without risk adjustment, with a composite exposure of organizational factors, stratified by intensity of daytime staffing and by ICU type, yielded similar results. Minimal or no differences were observed in ICU and hospital length of stay and several other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding limitations of the predominantly observational evidence, our systematic review and meta-analysis suggests nighttime intensivist staffing is not associated with reduced ICU patient mortality. Other outcomes and alternative staffing models should be evaluated to further guide staffing decisions.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica/mortalidad , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Admisión y Programación de Personal , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/organización & administración , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos , Recursos Humanos
6.
Crit Care Med ; 45(1): 75-84, 2017 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27526267

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Hospitals vary widely in ICU admission rates across numerous medical diagnoses. The extent to which variability in ICU use is specific to individual diagnoses or is a function of the hospital, regardless of disease, is unknown. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A total of 1,120 acute care hospitals with ICU capabilities. PATIENTS: Medicare beneficiaries 65 years old or older admitted for five medical diagnoses (acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, stroke, pneumonia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and a surgical diagnosis (hip fracture treated with arthroplasty) in 2010. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We used multilevel models to calculate risk- and reliability-adjusted ICU admission rates, examined the correlation in ICU admission rates across diagnosis and calculated intraclass correlation coefficients and median odds ratios to quantify the variability in ICU admission rate that was attributable to hospitals. We also examined the ability of a high ICU-use hospital for one condition to predict high ICU use for other conditions. We identified 348,462 patients with one of the eligible conditions. ICU admission rates were positively correlated within hospitals for included medical diagnoses (r range, 0.38-0.59; p < 0.01). The top hospital quartile of ICU use for congestive heart failure had a sensitivity of 50-60% and specificity of 79-81% for detecting top quartile hospitals for each other conditions. After adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics, hospitals accounted for 17.6% (95% CI, 16.2-19.1%) of variability in ICU admission, corresponding to a median odds ratio of 2.3, compared to 25.8% (95% CI, 24.5-27.1%) and median odds ratio 2.8 for diagnosis. This suggests a patient with median baseline risk of ICU admission would more than double his/her odds of ICU admission if moving to a higher utilizing hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals account for a significant proportion of variation independent of measured patient and hospital characteristics, suggesting the need for further work to evaluate the causes of variation at the hospital level and potential consequences of variation across hospitals.


Asunto(s)
Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/epidemiología , Fracturas de Cadera/epidemiología , Fracturas de Cadera/cirugía , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiología , Neumonía/epidemiología , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
7.
Crit Care Med ; 45(7): 1130-1137, 2017 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28471814

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To determine national readmission rates among sepsis survivors, variations in rates between hospitals, and determine whether measures of quality correlate with performance on sepsis readmissions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of sepsis readmissions between 2008 and 2011 in the Medicare fee-for-service database. SETTING: Acute care, Medicare participating hospitals from 2008 to 2011. PATIENTS: Septic patients as identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes using the Angus method. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We generated hospital-level, risk-standardized, 30-day readmission rates among survivors of sepsis and compared rates across region, ownership, teaching status, sepsis volume, hospital size, and proportion of underserved patients. We examined the relationship between risk-standardized readmission rates and hospital-level composite measures of quality and mortality. From 633,407 hospitalizations among 3,315 hospitals from 2008 to 2011, median risk-standardized readmission rates was 28.7% (interquartile range, 26.1-31.9). There were differences in risk-standardized readmission rates by region (Northeast, 30.4%; South, 29.6%; Midwest, 28.8%; and West, 27.7%; p < 0.001), teaching versus nonteaching status (31.1% vs 29.0%; p < 0.001), and hospitals serving the highest proportion of underserved patients (30.6% vs 28.7%; p < 0.001). The best performing hospitals on a composite quality measure had highest risk-standardized readmission rates compared with the lowest (32.0% vs 27.5%; p < 0.001). Risk-standardized readmission rates was lower in the highest mortality hospitals compared with those in the lowest (28.7% vs 30.7%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: One third of sepsis survivors were readmitted and wide variation exists between hospitals. Several demographic and structural factors are associated with this variation. Measures of higher quality in-hospital care were correlated with higher readmission rates. Several potential explanations are possible including poor risk standardization, more research is needed.


Asunto(s)
Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Sepsis/terapia , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Comorbilidad , Estudios Transversales , Planes de Aranceles por Servicios , Femenino , Capacidad de Camas en Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales de Alto Volumen/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales de Enseñanza/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Propiedad , Factores Socioeconómicos , Estados Unidos
8.
Crit Care Med ; 45(3): e246-e254, 2017 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27749319

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Despite increasing use, evidence is mixed as to the appropriate use of noninvasive ventilation in patients with pneumonia. We aimed to determine the relationship between receipt of noninvasive ventilation and outcomes for patients with pneumonia in a real-world setting. DESIGN, SETTING, PATIENTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries (aged > 64 yr) admitted to 2,757 acute-care hospitals in the United States with pneumonia, who received mechanical ventilation from 2010 to 2011. EXPOSURES: Noninvasive ventilation versus invasive mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was 30-day mortality with Medicare reimbursement as a secondary outcome. To account for unmeasured confounding associated with noninvasive ventilation use, an instrumental variable was used-the differential distance to a high noninvasive ventilation use hospital. All models were adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics to account for measured differences between groups. Among 65,747 Medicare beneficiaries with pneumonia who required mechanical ventilation, 12,480 (19%) received noninvasive ventilation. Patients receiving noninvasive ventilation were more likely to be older, male, white, rural-dwelling, have fewer comorbidities, and were less likely to be acutely ill as measured by organ failures. Results of the instrumental variable analysis suggested that, among marginal patients, receipt of noninvasive ventilation was not significantly associated with differences in 30-day mortality when compared with invasive mechanical ventilation (54% vs 55%; p = 0.92; 95% CI of absolute difference, -13.8 to 12.4) but was associated with significantly lower Medicare spending ($18,433 vs $27,051; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with pneumonia who received mechanical ventilation, noninvasive ventilation use was not associated with a real-world mortality benefit. Given the wide CIs, however, substantial harm associated with noninvasive ventilation could not be excluded. The use of noninvasive ventilation for patients with pneumonia should be cautioned, but targeted enrollment of marginal patients with pneumonia could enrich future randomized trials.


Asunto(s)
Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Ventilación no Invasiva/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía/mortalidad , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Estado de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare/economía , Ventilación no Invasiva/economía , Neumonía/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores Sexuales , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
9.
Crit Care Med ; 45(1): 103-128, 2017 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27984278

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To provide clinicians with evidence-based strategies to optimize the support of the family of critically ill patients in the ICU. METHODS: We used the Council of Medical Specialty Societies principles for the development of clinical guidelines as the framework for guideline development. We assembled an international multidisciplinary team of 29 members with expertise in guideline development, evidence analysis, and family-centered care to revise the 2007 Clinical Practice Guidelines for support of the family in the patient-centered ICU. We conducted a scoping review of qualitative research that explored family-centered care in the ICU. Thematic analyses were conducted to support Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome question development. Patients and families validated the importance of interventions and outcomes. We then conducted a systematic review using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology to make recommendations for practice. Recommendations were subjected to electronic voting with pre-established voting thresholds. No industry funding was associated with the guideline development. RESULTS: The scoping review yielded 683 qualitative studies; 228 were used for thematic analysis and Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome question development. The systematic review search yielded 4,158 reports after deduplication and 76 additional studies were added from alerts and hand searches; 238 studies met inclusion criteria. We made 23 recommendations from moderate, low, and very low level of evidence on the topics of: communication with family members, family presence, family support, consultations and ICU team members, and operational and environmental issues. We provide recommendations for future research and work-tools to support translation of the recommendations into practice. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines identify the evidence base for best practices for family-centered care in the ICU. All recommendations were weak, highlighting the relative nascency of this field of research and the importance of future research to identify the most effective interventions to improve this important aspect of ICU care.


Asunto(s)
Relaciones Familiares , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Atención Dirigida al Paciente , Relaciones Profesional-Familia , Humanos
10.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 193(2): 163-70, 2016 Jan 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26372779

RESUMEN

RATIONALE: Intermediate care (i.e., step-down or progressive care) is an alternative to the intensive care unit (ICU) for patients with moderate severity of illness. The adoption and current use of intermediate care is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To characterize trends in intermediate care use among U.S. hospitals. METHODS: We examined 135 million acute care hospitalizations among elderly individuals (≥65 yr) enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare (U.S. federal health insurance program) from 1996 to 2010. We identified patients receiving intermediate care as those with intensive care or coronary care room and board charges labeled intermediate ICU. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In 1996, a total of 960 of the 3,425 hospitals providing critical care billed for intermediate care (28%), and this increased to 1,643 of 2,783 hospitals (59%) in 2010 (P < 0.01). Only 8.2% of Medicare hospitalizations in 1996 were billed for intermediate care, but billing steadily increased to 22.8% by 2010 (P < 0.01), whereas the percentage billed for ICU care and ward-only care declined. Patients billed for intermediate care had more acute organ failures diagnoses codes compared with general ward patients (22.4% vs. 15.8%). When compared with patients billed for ICU care, those billed for intermediate care had fewer organ failures (22.4% vs. 43.4%), less mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 16.7%), lower mean Medicare spending ($8,514 vs. $18,150), and lower 30-day mortality (5.6% vs. 16.5%) (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Intermediate care billing increased markedly between 1996 and 2010. These findings highlight the need to better define the value, specific practices, and effective use of intermediate care for patients and hospitals.


Asunto(s)
Planes de Aranceles por Servicios/economía , Administración Financiera de Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/economía , Medicare/economía , Contabilidad de Pagos y Cobros , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Planes de Aranceles por Servicios/tendencias , Femenino , Administración Financiera de Hospitales/tendencias , Hospitales/tendencias , Humanos , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/tendencias , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Tiempo de Internación/tendencias , Masculino , Medicare/tendencias , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos
11.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 194(8): 1015-1025, 2016 10 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27739895

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Many advances in health care fail to reach patients. Implementation science is the study of novel approaches to mitigate this evidence-to-practice gap. METHODS: The American Thoracic Society (ATS) created a multidisciplinary ad hoc committee to develop a research statement on implementation science in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. The committee used an iterative consensus process to define implementation science and review the use of conceptual frameworks to guide implementation science for the pulmonary, critical care, and sleep community and to explore how professional medical societies such as the ATS can promote implementation science. RESULTS: The committee defined implementation science as the study of the mechanisms by which effective health care interventions are either adopted or not adopted in clinical and community settings. The committee also distinguished implementation science from the act of implementation. Ideally, implementation science should include early and continuous stakeholder involvement and the use of conceptual frameworks (i.e., models to systematize the conduct of studies and standardize the communication of findings). Multiple conceptual frameworks are available, and we suggest the selection of one or more frameworks on the basis of the specific research question and setting. Professional medical societies such as the ATS can have an important role in promoting implementation science. Recommendations for professional societies to consider include: unifying implementation science activities through a single organizational structure, linking front-line clinicians with implementation scientists, seeking collaborations to prioritize and conduct implementation science studies, supporting implementation science projects through funding opportunities, working with research funding bodies to set the research agenda in the field, collaborating with external bodies responsible for health care delivery, disseminating results of implementation science through scientific journals and conferences, and teaching the next generation about implementation science through courses and other media. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation science plays an increasingly important role in health care. Through support of implementation science, the ATS and other professional medical societies can work with other stakeholders to lead this effort.


Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos , Neumología , Medicina del Sueño , Investigación Biomédica Traslacional , Cuidados Críticos/normas , Difusión de Innovaciones , Humanos , Enfermedades Pulmonares/terapia , Política Organizacional , Neumología/normas , Medicina del Sueño/normas , Trastornos del Sueño-Vigilia/terapia , Sociedades Médicas/normas , Investigación Biomédica Traslacional/normas
12.
Crit Care Med ; 44(7): 1353-60, 2016 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26968023

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Changes in population demographics and comorbid illness prevalence, improvements in medical care, and shifts in care delivery may be driving changes in the composition of patients admitted to the ICU. We sought to describe the changing demographics, diagnoses, and outcomes of patients admitted to critical care units in the U.S. hospitals. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: U.S. hospitals. PATIENTS: There were 27.8 million elderly (age, > 64 yr) fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with an intensive care or coronary care room and board charge from 1996 to 2010. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We aggregated primary International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification discharge diagnosis codes into diagnoses and disease categories. We examined trends in demographics, primary diagnosis, and outcomes among patients with critical care stays. Between 1996 and 2010, we found significant declines in patients with a primary diagnosis of cardiovascular disease, including coronary artery disease (26.6 to 12.6% of admissions) and congestive heart failure (8.5 to 5.4% of admissions). Patients with infectious diseases increased from 8.8% to 17.2% of admissions, and explicitly labeled sepsis moved from the 11th-ranked diagnosis in 1996 to the top-ranked primary discharge diagnosis in 2010. Crude in-hospital mortality rose (11.3 to 12.0%), whereas discharge destinations among survivors shifted, with an increase in discharges to hospice and postacute care facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Primary diagnoses of patients admitted to critical care units have substantially changed over 15 years. Funding agencies, physician accreditation groups, and quality improvement initiatives should ensure that their efforts account for the shifting epidemiology of critical illness.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Enfermedades Transmisibles/epidemiología , Hospitalización/tendencias , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/tendencias , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Unidades de Cuidados Coronarios/tendencias , Planes de Aranceles por Servicios , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
13.
Crit Care Med ; 44(8): 1506-14, 2016 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27031382

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Controversy exists regarding perceived benefits of early tracheostomy to facilitate weaning among mechanically ventilated patients, potentially leading to significant practice-pattern variation with implications for outcomes and resource utilization. We sought to determine practice-pattern variation and outcomes associated with tracheostomy timing in the United States. DESIGN: In a retrospective cohort study, we identified mechanically ventilated patients with the most common causes of respiratory failure leading to tracheostomy: pneumonia/sepsis and trauma. "Early tracheostomy" was performed within the first week of mechanical ventilation. We determined between-hospital variation in early tracheostomy utilization and the association of early tracheostomy with patient outcomes using hierarchical regression. SETTING: 2012 National Inpatient Sample. PATIENTS: A total of 6,075 pneumonia/sepsis patients and 12,030 trauma patients with tracheostomy. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Trauma patients were twice as likely as pneumonia/sepsis patients to receive early tracheostomy (44.5% vs 21.7%; p < 0.001). Admission to hospitals with higher early tracheostomy-to-total-tracheostomy ratios was associated with increased risk for tracheostomy among mechanically ventilated trauma patients (adjusted odds ratio = 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.07) but not pneumonia/sepsis (adjusted odds ratio =1.00; 95% CI, 0.98-1.02). We observed greater between-hospital variation in early tracheostomy rates among trauma patients (21.9-81.9%) compared with pneumonia/sepsis (14.9-38.3%; p < 0.0001). We found no evidence of improved hospital mortality. Pneumonia/sepsis patients with early tracheostomy had fewer feeding tube procedures and higher odds of discharge home. CONCLUSION: Early tracheostomy is potentially overused among mechanically ventilated trauma patients, with nearly half of tracheostomies performed within the first week of mechanical ventilation and large unexplained hospital variation, without clear benefits. Future studies are needed to characterize potentially differential benefits for early tracheostomy between disease subgroups and to investigate factors driving hospital variation in tracheostomy timing.


Asunto(s)
Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia , Traqueostomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Desconexión del Ventilador/métodos , Factores de Edad , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nutrición Parenteral/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía/complicaciones , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Respiración Artificial/estadística & datos numéricos , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sepsis/complicaciones , Factores Sexuales , Factores Socioeconómicos , Traqueostomía/métodos , Estados Unidos , Desconexión del Ventilador/mortalidad
14.
Anesthesiology ; 124(4): 899-907, 2016 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26825149

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Use of intensive care after major surgical procedures and whether routinely admitting patients to intensive care units (ICUs) improve outcomes or increase costs is unknown. METHODS: The authors examined frequency of admission to an ICU during the hospital stay for Medicare beneficiaries undergoing selected major surgical procedures: elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, cystectomy, pancreaticoduodenectomy, esophagectomy, and elective open AAA repair. The authors compared hospital mortality, length of stay, and Medicare payments for patients receiving each procedure in hospitals admitting patients to the ICU less than 50% of the time (low use), 50 to 89% (moderate use), and 90% or greater (high use), adjusting for patient and hospital factors. RESULTS: The cohort ranged from 7,878 patients in 162 hospitals for esophagectomies to 69,989 patients in 866 hospitals for endovascular AAA. Overall admission to ICU ranged from 35.6% (endovascular AAA) to 71.3% (open AAA). Admission to ICU across hospitals ranged from less than 5% to 100% of patients for each surgical procedure. There was no association between hospital use of intensive care and mortality for any of the five surgical procedures. There was a consistent association between high use of intensive care with longer length of hospital stay and higher Medicare payments only for endovascular AAA. CONCLUSIONS: There is little consensus regarding the need for intensive care for patients undergoing major surgical procedures and no relationship between a hospital's use of intensive care and hospital mortality. There is also no consistent relationship across surgical procedures between use of intensive care and either length of hospital stay or payments for care.


Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Operativos/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
15.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 192(4): 446-54, 2015 Aug 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25955332

RESUMEN

RATIONALE: National trends in tracheostomy for mechanical ventilation (MV) patients are not well characterized. OBJECTIVES: To investigate trends in tracheostomy use, timing, and outcomes in the United States. METHODS: We calculated estimates of tracheostomy use and outcomes from the National Inpatient Sample from 1993 to 2012. We used hierarchical models to determine factors associated with tracheostomy use among MV patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 1,352,432 adults who received tracheostomy from 1993 to 2012 (9.1% of MV patients). Tracheostomy was more common in surgical patients, men, and racial/ethnic minorities. Age-adjusted incidence of tracheostomy increased by 106%, rising disproportionately to MV use. Among MV patients, tracheostomy rose from 6.9% in 1993 to 9.8% in 2008, and then it declined to 8.7% in 2012 (P < 0.0001). Increases in tracheostomy use were driven by surgical patients (9.5% in 1993; 15.0% in 2012; P < 0.0001), with little change among nonsurgical patients (5.8% in 1993; 5.9% in 2012; P < 0.0001). Over time, tracheostomies were performed earlier (median, 11 d in 1998; 10 d in 2012; P < 0.0001), whereas hospital length of stay declined (median, 39 d in 1993; 26 d in 2012; P < 0.0001), discharges to long-term facilities increased (40.1% vs. 71.9%; P < 0.0001), and hospital mortality declined (38.1% vs. 14.7%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Over the past two decades, tracheostomy use rose substantially in the United States until 2008, when use began to decline. The observed dramatic increase in discharge of tracheostomy patients to long-term care facilities may have significant implications for clinical care, healthcare costs, policy, and research. Future studies should include long-term facilities when analyzing outcomes of tracheostomy.


Asunto(s)
Respiración Artificial , Traqueostomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Selección de Paciente , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Estados Unidos
17.
Am Heart J ; 170(6): 1161-9, 2015 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26678638

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The treatment for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was transformed by the introduction of intensive care units (ICUs), yet we know little about how contemporary hospitals use this resource-intensive setting and whether higher use is associated with better outcomes. METHODS: We identified 114,136 adult hospitalizations for AMI from 307 hospitals in the 2009 to 2010 Premier database using codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification. Hospitals were stratified into quartiles by rates of ICU admission for AMI patients. Across quartiles, we examined in-hospital risk-standardized mortality rates and usage rates of critical care therapies for these patients. RESULTS: Rates of ICU admission for AMI patients varied markedly among hospitals (median 48%, Q1-Q4 20%-71%, range 0%-98%), and there was no association with in-hospital risk-standardized mortality rates (6% all quartiles, P = .7). However, hospitals admitting more AMI patients to the ICU were more likely to use critical care therapies overall (mechanical ventilation [from Q1 with lowest rate of ICU use to Q4 with highest rate 13%-16%], vasopressors/inotropes [17%-21%], intra-aortic balloon pumps [4%-7%], and pulmonary artery catheters [4%-5%]; P for trend < .05 in all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of ICU admission for patients with AMI vary substantially across hospitals and were not associated with differences in mortality, but were associated with greater use of critical care therapies. These findings suggest uncertainty about the appropriate use of this resource-intensive setting and a need to optimize ICU triage for patients who will truly benefit.


Asunto(s)
Infarto de la Pared Anterior del Miocardio , Unidades de Cuidados Coronarios , Admisión del Paciente/normas , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Infarto de la Pared Anterior del Miocardio/diagnóstico , Infarto de la Pared Anterior del Miocardio/economía , Infarto de la Pared Anterior del Miocardio/terapia , Unidades de Cuidados Coronarios/economía , Unidades de Cuidados Coronarios/métodos , Unidades de Cuidados Coronarios/estadística & datos numéricos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Triaje/organización & administración , Triaje/normas , Estados Unidos
18.
Crit Care Med ; 43(5): 989-95, 2015 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25746747

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Risk-standardized 30-day mortality and hospital readmission rates for pneumonia are increasingly being tied to hospital reimbursement to incentivize the delivery of high-quality care. Such measures may be susceptible to gaming by recoding patients with pneumonia to a primary diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure. We sought to determine the degree to which hospitals can game mortality or readmission measures and change their rankings by recoding patients with pneumonia. DESIGN AND SETTING: Simulated experimental study of 2,906 U.S. acute care hospitals with at least 25 admissions for pneumonia using 2009 Medicare data. PATIENTS: Elderly (age ≥ 65 yr) Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized with pneumonia. Patients eligible for recoding to sepsis or respiratory failure were those with a principal International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, Clinical Modification, discharge code for pneumonia and secondary codes for respiratory failure or acute organ dysfunction. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We measured the number of hospitals that improved their pneumonia mortality or readmission rates after recoding eligible patients. When a sample of 100 hospitals with pneumonia mortality rates above the 50th percentile recoded all eligible patients to sepsis or respiratory failure, 90 hospitals (95% CI, 84-95) improved their mortality rate (mean improvement, 1.09%; 95% CI, 0.94-1.28%) and 41 hospitals dropped below the 50th percentile (95% CI, 33-52). When a sample of 100 hospitals with pneumonia readmission rates above the 50th percentile recoded all eligible patients, 66 hospitals (95% CI, 54-75) improved their readmission rate (mean improvement, 0.34%; 95% CI, 0.19-0.45%) and 15 hospitals (95% CI, 9-22) dropped below the 50th percentile. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals can improve apparent pneumonia mortality and readmission rates by recoding pneumonia patients. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should consider changes to their methods used to calculate hospital-level pneumonia outcome measures to make them less susceptible to gaming.


Asunto(s)
Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía/mortalidad , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Sepsis/mortalidad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Administración Hospitalaria , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Masculino , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos
19.
Crit Care Med ; 43(6): 1178-86, 2015 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25760660

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Quality of care for patients admitted with pneumonia varies across hospitals, but causes of this variation are poorly understood. Whether hospitals with high ICU utilization for patients with pneumonia provide better quality care is unknown. We sought to investigate the relationship between a hospital's ICU admission rate for elderly patients with pneumonia and the quality of care it provided to patients with pneumonia. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Two thousand eight hundred twelve U.S. hospitals. PATIENTS: Elderly (age≥65 years) fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with either a (1) principal diagnosis of pneumonia or (2) principal diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure and secondary diagnosis of pneumonia in 2008. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We grouped hospitals into quintiles based on ICU admission rates for pneumonia. We compared rates of failure to deliver pneumonia processes of care (calculated as 100-adherence rate), 30-day mortality, hospital readmissions, and Medicare spending across hospital quintile. After controlling for other hospital characteristics, hospitals in the highest quintile more often failed to deliver pneumonia process measures, including appropriate initial antibiotics (13.0% vs 10.7%; p<0.001), and pneumococcal vaccination (15.0% vs 13.3%; p=0.03) compared with hospitals in quintiles 1-4. Hospitals in the highest quintile of ICU admission rate for pneumonia also had higher 30-day mortality, 30-day hospital readmission rates, and hospital spending per patient than other hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of care was lower among hospitals with the highest rates of ICU admission for elderly patients with pneumonia; such hospitals were less likely to deliver pneumonia processes of care and had worse outcomes for patients with pneumonia. High pneumonia-specific ICU admission rates for elderly patients identify a group of hospitals that may deliver inefficient and poor-quality pneumonia care and may benefit from interventions to improve care delivery.


Asunto(s)
Hospitales de Alto Volumen/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía/terapia , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Protocolos Clínicos , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Adhesión a Directriz , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Vacunas Neumococicas/administración & dosificación , Neumonía/mortalidad , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores Sexuales , Estados Unidos
20.
Crit Care ; 19: 347, 2015 Oct 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26424079

RESUMEN

Race has been identified as an important risk factor for the development of sepsis and as a predictor of poor outcomes in sepsis. For example, black individuals have been demonstrated to be nearly twice as likely to develop sepsis and to have greater mortality from sepsis than white individuals. Recent data from a longitudinal cohort, which examined incident hospitalizations for infections occurring among participants in the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort, contradicts this prior research. Investigators determined that black participants were significantly less likely than white participants to present to the hospital with either infection or sepsis. Although these results are intriguing, they highlight our inadequate understanding of the relationship between race and sepsis and motivate the need for higher quality epidemiologic research to isolate the true role of race in the development of sepsis.


Asunto(s)
Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricos , Sepsis/epidemiología , Estudios Epidemiológicos , Humanos , Factores de Riesgo , Sepsis/etnología , Sepsis/etiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA