Dataset Information

Patient and Hospital Characteristics Associated with Interhospital Transfer for Adults with Ventilator-Dependent Respiratory Failure.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale

Patients with ventilator-dependent respiratory failure have improved outcomes at centers with greater expertise; yet, most patients are not treated in such facilities. Efforts to align care for respiratory failure and hospital capability would necessarily require interhospital transfer.

Objectives

To characterize the prevalence and the patient and hospital factors associated with interhospital transfer of adults residing in Florida with ventilator-dependent respiratory failure.

Methods

We performed a retrospective, observational study using Florida Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data. We selected patients 18 years of age and older with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes of respiratory failure and mechanical ventilation during 2012 and 2013, and we identified cohorts of patients that did and did not undergo interhospital transfer. We obtained patient sociodemographic and clinical variables and categorized hospitals into subtypes on the basis of patient volume and services provided: large, medium (nonprofit or for-profit), and small.

Results

Interhospital transfer was our primary outcome measure. Patient sociodemographics, clinical variables, and hospital types were used as covariates. We identified 2,580 patients with ventilator-dependent respiratory failure who underwent interhospital transfer. Overall, transfer was uncommon, with only 2.9% of patients being transferred. In a hierarchical model, age less than 65 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.77-2.45) and tracheostomy (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 2.80-3.65) were associated with higher odds of transfer, whereas having Medicaid was associated with lower odds of transfer than having commercial insurance (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56-0.75). Additionally, care in medium-sized for-profit hospitals was associated with lower odds of transfer (OR, 1.37 vs. 2.70) than care in medium nonprofit hospitals, despite similar hospital characteristics.

Conclusions

In Florida, interhospital transfer of patients with ventilator-dependent respiratory failure is uncommon and more likely among younger, commercially insured, medically resource-intensive patients. For-profit hospitals are less likely to transfer than nonprofit hospitals. In future studies, researchers should test for geographic variations and examine the clinical implications of selectivity in interhospital transfer of patients with ventilator-dependent respiratory failure.

SUBMITTER: Nadig NR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5427742 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAlthough patients with emergency general surgery (EGS) conditions frequently undergo interhospital transfers, the transfer patterns and associated factors are not well understood.ObjectiveTo examine whether patients with EGS conditions are consistently directed to hospitals with more resources and better outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study performed a network analysis of interhospital transfers among adults with EGS conditions from January 1 to December 31, 2016. The analysis used all-payer claims data from the 2016 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project state inpatient and emergency department databases in 8 states. A total of 728 hospitals involving 85 415 transfers of 80 307 patients were included. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were 18 years or older and had an acute care hospital encounter with a diagnosis of an EGS condition as defined by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2020, to June 17, 2021.ExposuresHospital-level measures of size (total bed capacity), resources (intensive care unit [ICU] bed capacity, teaching status, trauma center designation, and presence of trauma and/or surgical critical care fellowships), EGS volume (annual EGS encounters), and EGS outcomes (risk-adjusted failure to rescue and in-hospital mortality).Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was hospital-level centrality ratio, defined as the normalized number of incoming transfers divided by the number of outgoing transfers. A higher centrality ratio indicated more incoming transfers per outgoing transfer. Multivariable regression analysis was used to test the hypothesis that a higher hospital centrality ratio would be associated with more resources, higher volume, and better outcomes.ResultsAmong 80 307 total patients, the median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 50-75 years); 52.1% of patients were male and 78.8% were White. The median number of outgoing and incoming transfers per hospital were 106 (IQR, 61-157) and 36 (IQR, 8-137), respectively. A higher log-transformed centrality ratio was associated with more resources, such as higher ICU capacity (eg, >25 beds vs 0-10 beds: β = 1.67 [95% CI, 1.16-2.17]; P < .001), and higher EGS volume (eg, quartile 4 [highest] vs quartile 1 [lowest]: β = 0.78 [95% CI, 0-1.57]; P = .01). However, a higher log-transformed centrality ratio was not associated with better outcomes, such as lower in-hospital mortality (eg, quartile 4 [highest] vs quartile 1 [lowest]: β = 0.30 [95% CI, -0.09 to 0.68]; P = .83) and lower failure to rescue (eg, quartile 4 [highest] vs quartile 1 [lowest]: β = -0.50 [95% CI, -1.13 to 0.12]; P = .27).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, EGS transfers were directed to high-volume hospitals with more resources but were not necessarily directed to hospitals with better clinical outcomes. Optimizing transfer destination in the interhospital transfer network has the potential to improve EGS outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundNational administrative datasets have demonstrated increased risk-adjusted mortality among patients undergoing interhospital transfer (IHT) compared to patients admitted through the emergency department (ED).ObjectiveTo investigate the impact of patient-level data not available in larger administrative datasets on the association between IHT status and in-hospital mortality.DesignRetrospective cohort study with logistic regression analyses to examine the association between IHT status and in-hospital mortality, controlling for covariates that were potential confounders. Model 1: IHT status, admit service. Model 2: model 1 and patient demographics. Model 3: model 2 and disease-specific conditions. Model 4: model 3 and vital signs and laboratory data.ParticipantsNine thousand three hundred twenty-eight adults admitted to Medicine services.Main measuresInterhospital transfer status, coded as an unordered categorical variable (IHT vs ED vs clinic), was the independent variable. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included unadjusted length of stay and total cost.Key resultsIHT patients accounted for 180 out of 484 (37%) in-hospital deaths, despite accounting for only 17% of total admissions. Unadjusted mean length of stay was 8.4 days vs 5.6 days (p < 0.0001) and mean total cost was $22,647 vs $12,968 (p < 0.0001) for patients admitted via IHT vs ED respectively. The odds ratios (OR) for in-hospital mortality for patients admitted via IHT compared to the ED were as follows: model 1 OR, 2.06 (95% CI 1.66-2.56, p < 0.0001); model 2 OR, 2.07 (95% CI 1.66-2.58, p < 0.0001); model 3 OR, 2.07 (95% CI 1.63-2.61, p < 0.0001); model 4 OR, 1.70 (95% CI 1.31-2.19, p < 0.0001). The AUCs of the models were as follows: model 1, 0.74; model 2, 0.76; model 3, 0.83; model 4, 0.88, consistent with a good prediction model.ConclusionsPatient-level characteristics affect the association between IHT and in-hospital mortality. After adjusting for patient-level clinical characteristics, IHT status remains associated with in-hospital mortality.

Project description:BackgroundUnlike well-established diseases that base clinical care on randomized trials, past experiences, and training, prognosis in COVID19 relies on a weaker foundation. Knowledge from other respiratory failure diseases may inform clinical decisions in this novel disease. The objective was to predict 48-hour invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) within 48 h in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using COVID-like diseases (CLD).MethodsThis retrospective multicenter study trained machine learning (ML) models on patients hospitalized with CLD to predict IMV within 48 h in COVID-19 patients. CLD patients were identified using diagnosis codes for bacterial pneumonia, viral pneumonia, influenza, unspecified pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), 2008-2019. A total of 16 cohorts were constructed, including any combinations of the four diseases plus an exploratory ARDS cohort, to determine the most appropriate cohort to use. Candidate predictors included demographic and clinical parameters that were previously associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes. Model development included the implementation of logistic regression and three ensemble tree-based algorithms: decision tree, AdaBoost, and XGBoost. Models were validated in hospitalized COVID-19 patients at two healthcare systems, March 2020-July 2020. ML models were trained on CLD patients at Stanford Hospital Alliance (SHA). Models were validated on hospitalized COVID-19 patients at both SHA and Intermountain Healthcare.ResultsCLD training data were obtained from SHA (n = 14,030), and validation data included 444 adult COVID-19 hospitalized patients from SHA (n = 185) and Intermountain (n = 259). XGBoost was the top-performing ML model, and among the 16 CLD training cohorts, the best model achieved an area under curve (AUC) of 0.883 in the validation set. In COVID-19 patients, the prediction models exhibited moderate discrimination performance, with the best models achieving an AUC of 0.77 at SHA and 0.65 at Intermountain. The model trained on all pneumonia and influenza cohorts had the best overall performance (SHA: positive predictive value (PPV) 0.29, negative predictive value (NPV) 0.97, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) 10.7; Intermountain: PPV, 0.23, NPV 0.97, PLR 10.3). We identified important factors associated with IMV that are not traditionally considered for respiratory diseases.ConclusionsThe performance of prediction models derived from CLD for 48-hour IMV in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 demonstrate high specificity and can be used as a triage tool at point of care. Novel predictors of IMV identified in COVID-19 are often overlooked in clinical practice. Lessons learned from our approach may assist other research institutes seeking to build artificial intelligence technologies for novel or rare diseases with limited data for training and validation.

Project description:IntroductionWe previously showed in animals that the ratio of inspired tidal volume (Vtinsp) to inspiratory peak electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdipk) can be used to quantify the respective patient and ventilator breath contributions (PVBCs) during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA). The PVBC index has not been tested clinically.MethodsWe studied 12 intubated and mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory failure and measured EAdipk, airway (Paw) and inspiratory esophageal pressure (Pes) and Vtinsp. We applied 11 different NAVA levels, increasing them every 3 minutes in steps of 0.3 cm H₂O/μV from 0 to 3.0 cmH₂O/μV. At each NAVA level, one breath was non-assisted (NAVA level 0). PVBC indices were calculated by relating Vtinsp/EAdipk of the non-assisted breath to Vtinsp/EAdipk of the assisted breath(s) using one ((N1)PVBC) or the mean value of five preceding assisted breaths ((X5)PVBC). During assisted breaths, inspiratory changes in Pes (∆Pes) and transpulmonary (ΔPtp) pressures were used to calculate the relative contribution of patient to total inspiratory lung-distending pressures (ΔPes/ΔPtp). Matching of respiratory drive indices and squaring of the PVBC was evaluated for their effect on the correlation between PVBC and ΔPes/ΔPtp. Linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman analysis were applied to compare indices.ResultsUsing an average of five assisted breaths prior to the non-assisted breath and squaring the PVBC ((X5)PVBC(2)) improved determination coefficients (P <0.05), adjusted the regression slope and intercept between PVBC and ΔPes/ΔPtp toward identity (P <0.05) and reduced bias (P <0.05). Matching EAdipk between non-assisted and assisted breaths within the range of 0.77 to 1.30 improved the relationship between (X5)PVBC(2) and ΔPes/ΔPtp (P <0.05) and abolished the need for EAdi normalization in the PVBC calculation (R(2) = 0.96; bias = 0.16 ± 0.06; precision = 0.33 ± 0.08 (mean and 95% confidence interval)).ConclusionsThis clinical study confirms previous experimental results showing that the PVBC(2) predicts the contribution of the inspiratory muscles versus that of the ventilator during NAVA, when differences in effort (EAdi) between non-assisted and assisted breaths are limited. PVBC could help to quantify and standardize the adjustment of the level of assist, and hence reduce the risks of excessive ventilatory assist in patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01663480. Registered 9 August 2012.