Hospitalisation costs and health related quality of life in delirious patients: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Delirium is a common condition of a global disturbance of cognition, triggered by underlying diseases. The objective of this study is to review the current evidence in the literature on direct healthcare costs and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) associated with delirium. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Embase for relevant studies published between January 1, 2010 and November 4, 2021. Studies for inclusion reported estimates on healthcare costs or HRQOL, adjusted for relevant confounding factors. RESULTS: Fourteen studies on healthcare costs and eleven studies on HRQOL were included. Delirium resulted in (adjusted) increased costs ranging from $1,532 to $22,269 depending on included cost categories, the country and the type of hospital department. Increased length of stay for delirious patients ranged from 2.5 days to 10.4 days and had the largest contribution to overall, direct incremental costs. Heterogeneity was observed in HRQOL outcomes. CONCLUSION: The analysis indicates that the presence of a delirium episode may lead to increased costs of hospitalisation. Changes in HRQOL due to delirium are not well demonstrated and more research is needed to determine the effect of delirium on HRQOL.

Assessment of mobilization capacity in 10 different ICU scenarios by different professions.

BACKGROUND: Mobilization of intensive care patients is a multi-professional task. Aim of this study was to explore how different professions working at Intensive Care Units (ICU) estimate the mobility capacity using the ICU Mobility Score in 10 different scenarios. METHODS: Ten fictitious patient-scenarios and guideline-related knowledge were assessed using an online survey. Critical care team members in German-speaking countries were invited to participate. All datasets including professional data and at least one scenario were analyzed. Kruskal Wallis test was used for the individual scenarios, while a linear mixed-model was used over all responses. RESULTS: In total, 515 of 788 (65%) participants could be evaluated. Physicians (p = 0.001) and nurses (p = 0.002) selected a lower ICU Mobility Score (-0.7 95% CI -1.1 to -0.3 and -0.4 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2, respectively) than physical therapists, while other specialists did not (p = 0.81). Participants who classified themselves as experts or could define early mobilization in accordance to the "S2e guideline: positioning and early mobilisation in prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary disorders" correctly selected higher mobilization levels (0.2 95% CI 0.0 to 0.4, p = 0.049 and 0.3 95% CI 0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSION: Different professions scored the mobilization capacity of patients differently, with nurses and physicians estimating significantly lower capacity than physical therapists. The exact knowledge of guidelines and recommendations, such as the definition of early mobilization, independently lead to a higher score. Interprofessional education, interprofessional rounds and mobilization activities could further enhance knowledge and practice of mobilization in the critical care team.

[Discussion paper for a hospital financing reform in Germany from the perspective of intensive care medicine]. / Diskussionspapier für eine Reform der Krankenhausfinanzierung in Deutschland aus der Perspektive der Intensivmedizin.

In Germany, there are currently many voices calling for a reform of hospital planning and reimbursement to correct some aberrations of the last decades and to enable the system to cope with future challenges. Some recent political decisions to change the structures of emergency medical services as well as the introduction of mandatory nurse-to-patient ratios and the exclusion of the cost for nursing from the case-based hospital reimbursement represent first steps of a reform, which also affects intensive care and emergency medicine. In this discussion paper a group of intensivists, emergency physicians, medical controllers, and representatives of nurses suggest more far-reaching changes, which can be summarized in 5 points: (1) General hospitals with intensive care units (ICU) and emergency departments (ED) which are part of the emergency medical system should be considered as an element of public service and be planned accordingly. (2) The planning of the intensive care infrastructure should be based on the three levels of emergency medical services to identify hospitals that are system relevant and to define appropriate criteria for structure and quality measures. (3) Hospital reimbursement should consist of a base amount (covering costs for hospital staff, infrastructure plus investments) and case-based fees (covering material costs). (4) To determine the requirements for nurses, physicians, and other medical staff, adequate tools for ICU and ED should be applied. (5) For these purposes as well as for quality management and optimal medical care, hospitals should be provided with a substantially improved IT-infrastructure.