Two Weeks Versus One Week of Maximal Patient-Intensivist Continuity for Adult Medical Intensive Care Patients: A Two-Center Target Trial Emulation.

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.

Rural-Urban Differences in Mortality among Mechanically Ventilated Patients in Intensive and Intermediate Care.

Rationale: Intermediate care (also termed "step-down" or "moderate care") has been proposed as a lower cost alternative to care for patients who may not clearly benefit from intensive care unit admission. Intermediate care units may be appealing to hospitals in financial crisis, including those in rural areas. Outcomes of patients receiving intermediate care are not widely described. Objectives: To examine relationships among rurality, location of care, and mortality for mechanically ventilated patients. Methods: Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older who received invasive mechanical ventilation between 2010 and 2019 were included. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between admission to a rural or an urban hospital and 30-day mortality, with separate analyses for patients in general, intermediate, and intensive care. Models were adjusted for age, sex, area deprivation index, primary diagnosis, severity of illness, year, comorbidities, and hospital volume. Results: There were 2,752,492 hospitalizations for patients receiving mechanical ventilation from 2010 to 2019, and 193,745 patients (7.0%) were in rural hospitals. The proportion of patients in rural intermediate care increased from 4.1% in 2010 to 6.3% in 2019. Patient admissions to urban hospitals remained relatively stable. Patients in rural and urban intensive care units had similar adjusted 30-day mortality, at 46.7% (adjusted absolute risk difference -0.1% [95% confidence interval, -0.7% to 0.6%]; P = 0.88). However, adjusted 30-day mortality for patients in rural intermediate care was significantly higher (36.9%) than for patients in urban intermediate care (31.3%) (adjusted absolute risk difference 5.6% [95% confidence interval, 3.7% to 7.6%]; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Hospitalization in rural intermediate care was associated with increased mortality. There is a need to better understand how intermediate care is used across hospitals and to carefully evaluate the types of patients admitted to intermediate care units.