Association Between Socioeconomic Status and Outcomes in Critical Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Socioeconomic status is well established as a key determinant of inequalities in health outcomes. Existing literature examining the impact of socioeconomic status on outcomes in critical care has produced inconsistent findings. Our objective was to synthesize the available evidence on the association between socioeconomic status and outcomes in critical care. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, and EMBASE was undertaken on September 13, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Observational cohort studies of adults assessing the association between socioeconomic status and critical care outcomes including mortality, length of stay, and functional outcomes were included. Two independent reviewers assessed titles, abstracts, and full texts against eligibility and quality criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Details of study methodology, population, exposure measures, and outcomes were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirty-eight studies met eligibility criteria for systematic review. Twenty-three studies reporting mortality to less than or equal to 30 days following critical care admission, and eight reporting length of stay, were included in meta-analysis. Random-effects pooled analysis showed that lower socioeconomic status was associated with higher mortality at less than or equal to 30 days following critical care admission, with pooled odds ratio of 1.13 (95% CIs, 1.05-1.22). Meta-analysis of ICU length of stay demonstrated no significant difference between socioeconomic groups. Socioeconomic status may also be associated with functional status and discharge destination following ICU admission. CONCLUSIONS: Lower socioeconomic status was associated with higher mortality following admission to critical care.

Can non-physician advanced retrieval practitioners (ARP) acquire and interpret diagnostic views of the lungs with sufficient quality to aid in the diagnosis of pneumothorax in the pre-hospital and retrieval environment?

BACKGROUND: As an adjunct to physical examination, ultrasound is a potentially attractive option for diagnosing pneumothoraces in the pre-hospital and retrieval environment - and could confer a benefit to patient safety. However, the published evidence supporting non-physicians use of ultrasound in this setting is limited. AIM: We aimed to establish if Advanced Retrieval Practitioners (non-physicians) could acquire ultrasound views of the lungs and interpret them with sufficient quality to diagnose pneumothorax in the pre-hospital and retrieval environment when compared to expert review. METHOD: The study consisted of an observational trial from April 2017 to April 2018. Twelve (12) patients bilateral lung ultrasound images (24 images) were randomly selected from 87 patients assessed using Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) by three Advanced Retrieval Practitioners in the Pre-hospital and Retrieval environment. Two expert reviewers' evaluated these images to determine ARPs ability to acquire diagnostic quality images and interpret them correctly. CXR results of patients in whom lung ultrasound was undertaken were recorded as the reference standard investigation. RESULTS: Within the 22 images considered adequate by the Advanced Retrieval Practitioners, 19 (86.4%, one-tailed McNemar test p = 0.125) were considered adequate on expert review. Of the 19 images mutually considered as adequate, both the Advanced Retrieval Practitioners and the reviewers identified two pneumothoraces which were subsequently confirmed on chest x-ray (Sensitivity 100% and Specificity 100% in technically adequate images). One pneumothorax was detected on CXR in a patient with inadequate ultrasound images. Advanced Retrieval Practitioners were therefore able to both obtain adequate images and correctly diagnose pneumothorax in the pre-hospital environment with 66.6% sensitivity (95%CI 66.6-100%) and 100% specificity (95%CI 81.0-100%) compared to expert review. CONCLUSION: Advanced Retrieval Practitioners (non-physicians) can obtain diagnostic views of the lungs of sufficient quality to diagnose the presence, or particularly the absence, of pneumothorax in the pre-hospital and retrieval environment. Although Advanced Retrieval Practitioners were less accurate than the expert reviewers at interpreting the quality of the ultrasound images, the result was not statistically significant, despite the ARPs possibly having been at a methodological disadvantage.