4.6 Review

Recommendations on the structure, personal, and organization of intensive care units

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1196060

关键词

intensive care medicine; personal; organization; structural requirements; quality of care; recommendation; guideline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article provides guidance and recommendations for the requirements of infrastructure, personal, and organization of intensive care units (ICU). It covers the levels and severity of illness, qualitative and quantitative requirements of physicians and nurses, as well as staffing with other specialists. Furthermore, it proposes suggestions for ICU equipment and construction.
Background: Intensive care units (ICU) are central facilities of medical care in hospitals world-wide and pose a significant financial burden on the health care system. Objectives: To provide guidance and recommendations for the requirements of (infra)structure, personal, and organization of intensive care units. Design and setting: Development of recommendations based on a systematic literature search and a formal consensus process from a group of multidisciplinary and multiprofessional specialists from the German Interdisciplinary Association of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (DIVI). The grading of the recommendation follows the report from an American College of Chest Physicians Task Force. Results: The recommendations cover the fields of a 3-staged level of intensive care units, a 3-staged level of care with respect to severity of illness, qualitative and quantitative requirements of physicians and nurses as well as staffing with physiotherapists, pharmacists, psychologists, palliative medicine and other specialists, all adapted to the 3 levels of ICUs. Furthermore, proposals concerning the equipment and the construction of ICUs are supplied. Conclusion: This document provides a detailed framework for organizing and planning the operation and construction/renovation of ICUs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据