Dataset Information

Nighttime intensivist staffing and the timing of death among ICU decedents: a retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT: Intensive care units (ICUs) are increasingly adopting 24-hour intensivist physician staffing. Although nighttime intensivist staffing does not consistently reduce mortality, it may affect other outcomes such as the quality of end-of-life care.We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ICU decedents using the 2009-2010 Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation clinical information system linked to a survey of ICU staffing practices. We restricted the analysis to ICUs with high-intensity daytime staffing, in which the addition of nighttime staffing does not influence mortality. We used multivariable regression to assess the relationship between nighttime intensivist staffing and two separate outcomes potentially related to the quality of end-of-life care: time from ICU admission to death and death at night.Of 30,456 patients admitted to 27 high-intensity daytime staffed ICUs, 3,553 died in the hospital within 30 days. After adjustment for potential confounders, admission to an ICU with nighttime intensivist staffing was associated with a shorter duration between ICU admission and death (adjusted difference: -2.5 days, 95% CI -3.5 to -1.5, p-value < 0.001) and a decreased odds of nighttime death (adjusted odds ratio: 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.94, p-value 0.011) compared to admission to an ICU without nighttime intensivist staffing.Among ICU decedents, nighttime intensivist staffing is associated with reduced time between ICU admission and death and reduced odds of nighttime death.

SUBMITTER: Reineck LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4057319 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nighttime intensivist staffing and the timing of death among ICU decedents: a retrospective cohort study.

Reineck Lora A LA Wallace David J DJ Barnato Amber E AE Kahn Jeremy M JM

Critical care (London, England) 20131003 5

<h4>Introduction</h4>Intensive care units (ICUs) are increasingly adopting 24-hour intensivist physician staffing. Although nighttime intensivist staffing does not consistently reduce mortality, it may affect other outcomes such as the quality of end-of-life care.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ICU decedents using the 2009-2010 Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation clinical information system linked to a survey of ICU staffing practices. We restricted the an ...[more]

PMID: 24090194

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare sleep, work hours, and behavioral alertness in faculty and fellows during a randomized trial of nighttime in-hospital intensivist staffing compared with a standard daytime intensivist model.DesignProspective observational study.SettingMedical ICU of a tertiary care academic medical center during a randomized controlled trial of in-hospital nighttime intensivist staffing.PatientsTwenty faculty and 13 fellows assigned to rotations in the medical ICU during 2012.InterventionsAs part of the parent study, there was weekly randomization of staffing model, stratified by 2-week faculty rotation. During the standard staffing model, there were in-hospital residents, with a fellow and faculty member available at nighttime by phone. In the intervention, there were in-hospital residents with an in-hospital nighttime intensivist. Fellows and faculty completed diaries detailing their sleep, work, and well-being; wore actigraphs; and performed psychomotor vigilance testing daily.Measurements and main resultsDaily sleep time (mean hours [SD]) was increased for fellows and faculty in the intervention versus control (6.7 [0.3] vs 6.0 [0.2]; p < 0.001 and 6.7 [0.1] vs 6.4 [0.2]; p < 0.001, respectively). In-hospital work duration did not differ between the models for fellows or faculty. Total hours of work done at home was different for both fellows and faculty (0.1 [< 0.1] intervention vs 1.0 [0.1] control; p < 0.001 and 0.2 [< 0.1] intervention vs 0.6 [0.1] control; p < 0.001, respectively). Psychomotor vigilance testing did not demonstrate any differences. Measures of well-being including physical exhaustion and alertness were improved in faculty and fellows in the intervention staffing model.ConclusionsAlthough no differences were measured in patient outcomes between the two staffing models, in-hospital nighttime intensivist staffing was associated with small increases in total sleep duration for faculty and fellows, reductions in total work hours for fellows only, and improvements in subjective well-being for both groups. Staffing models should consider how work duration, sleep, and well-being may impact burnout and sustainability.

Project description:BackgroundHospitals are increasingly adopting 24-hour intensivist physician staffing as a strategy to improve intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes. However, the degree to which nighttime intensivists are associated with improvements in the quality of ICU care is unknown.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study involving ICUs that participated in the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) clinical information system from 2009 through 2010, linking a survey of ICU staffing practices with patient-level outcomes data from adult ICU admissions. Multivariate models were used to assess the relationship between nighttime intensivist staffing and in-hospital mortality among ICU patients, with adjustment for daytime intensivist staffing, severity of illness, and case mix. We conducted a confirmatory analysis in a second, population-based cohort of hospitals in Pennsylvania from which less detailed data were available.ResultsThe analysis with the use of the APACHE database included 65,752 patients admitted to 49 ICUs in 25 hospitals. In ICUs with low-intensity daytime staffing, nighttime intensivist staffing was associated with a reduction in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio for death, 0.62; P=0.04). Among ICUs with high-intensity daytime staffing, nighttime intensivist staffing conferred no benefit with respect to risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.08; P=0.78). In the verification cohort, there was a similar relationship among daytime staffing, nighttime staffing, and in-hospital mortality. The interaction between nighttime staffing and daytime staffing was not significant (P=0.18), yet the direction of the findings were similar to those in the APACHE cohort.ConclusionsThe addition of nighttime intensivist staffing to a low-intensity daytime staffing model was associated with reduced mortality. However, a reduction in mortality was not seen in ICUs with high-intensity daytime staffing. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.).

Project description:Daytime intensivist physician staffing is associated with improved outcomes in the ICU. However, it is unclear whether this association persists in the era of interprofessional, protocol-directed critical care. We sought to reexamine the association between daytime intensivist physician staffing and ICU mortality and determine if interprofessional rounding and protocols for mechanical ventilation in part mediate this relationship.Retrospective cohort study of ICUs in the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation clinical information system from 2009 to 2010.Forty-nine ICUs in 25 U.S. hospitals.Adults (17 yr and older) admitted to a study ICU.None.We defined high-intensity daytime intensivist staffing as either a mandatory consult or closed ICU model; interprofessional rounds as rounds that included a respiratory therapist, pharmacist, physician and nurse; and protocol use as having protocols for liberation from mechanical ventilation and lung protective mechanical ventilation. Using multivariable logistic regression, we estimated the independent effect of daytime intensivist physician staffing on in-hospital mortality controlling for interprofessional rounds and protocols for mechanical ventilation, as well as other patient and hospital characteristics. Twenty-seven ICUs (55%) reported high-intensity daytime physician staffing, 42 ICUs (85%) reported daily interprofessional rounds, and 31 (63%) reported having protocols for mechanical ventilation. There was no association between daytime intensivist physician staffing and in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.65-1.14). After adjusting for interprofessional rounds and protocols for mechanical ventilation, the effect of daytime intensivist physician staffing remained nonsignificant (adjusted odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.70-1.17).High-intensity daytime physician staffing in the ICU was not significantly associated with lower mortality in a modern cohort. This association was not affected by interprofessional rounds or protocols for mechanical ventilation.

Project description:BackgroundA large body of research suggests that hospitals with intensive care units staffed by board-certified intensivists have lower mortality rates than those that do not.ObjectiveTo determine whether hospitals can reduce their mortality by adopting an intensivist staffing model.DesignRetrospective, longitudinal study using 2003-2010 Medicare data and the Leapfrog Group Hospital surveys.Setting and patientsIn total, 2,916,801 Medicare patients at 488 US hospitals.MeasurementsWe studied 30-day and in-hospital mortality among patients with several common medical and surgical conditions. We first compared risk-adjusted mortality rates of 3 groups of hospitals: those that were intensivist staffed throughout this time period, those that were not intensivist staffed, and those that transitioned to intensivist staffing somewhere during the period. We then examined rates of mortality improvement within each of the 3 groups and used difference-in-differences techniques to assess the independent effect of intensivist staffing among the subset of hospitals that transitioned.ResultsHospitals with intensivist staffing at the beginning of our study period had lower mortality rates than those without. However, hospitals that adopted intensivist staffing during the study period did not substantially improve their mortality rates. In our difference-in-differences analysis, there was no significant independent improvement in mortality after transitioning to intensivist staffing either overall [relative risk (RR), 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.90-1.02] or in the medical (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-1.02) or surgical populations (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.84-1.10).LimitationsRisk adjustment was based on administrative data. Categorization of exposure was by survey response at the hospital level.ConclusionsAdoption of an intensivist staffing model was not associated with improved mortality in Medicare beneficiaries. These findings suggest that the lower mortality rates previously observed at hospitals with intensivist staffing may be attributable to other factors.

Dataset Information

Nighttime intensivist staffing and the timing of death among ICU decedents: a retrospective cohort study.

Publications

Nighttime intensivist staffing and the timing of death among ICU decedents: a retrospective cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets