期刊
QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE
卷 16, 期 5, 页码 329-333出版社
BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2007.022376
关键词
-
资金
- NHLBI NIH HHS [K23 HL082650, K23HL082650] Funding Source: Medline
Background: Although intensivist physician staffing is associated with improved outcomes in critical care, little is known about the mechanism leading to this observation. Objective: To determine the relationship between intensivist staffing and select process-based quality indicators in the intensive care unit. Research design: Retrospective cohort study in 29 academic hospitals participating in the University HealthSystem Consortium Mechanically Ventilated Patient Bundle Benchmarking Project. Patients: 861 adult patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit. Results: Patient-level information on physician staffing and process-of-care quality indicators were collected on day 4 of mechanical ventilation. By day 4, 668 patients received care under a high intensity staffing model ( primary intensivist care or mandatory consult) and 193 patients received care under a low intensity staffing model ( optional consultation or no intensivist). Among eligible patients, those receiving care under a high intensity staffing model were more likely to receive prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis ( risk ratio 1.08, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.17), stress ulcer prophylaxis ( risk ratio 1.10, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.18), a spontaneous breathing trial ( risk ratio 1.37, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.94), interruption of sedation ( risk ratio 1.64, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.38) and intensive insulin treatment ( risk ratio 1.40, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.79) on day 4 of mechanical ventilation. Models accounting for clustering by hospital produced similar estimates of the staffing effect, except for prophylaxis against thrombosis and stress ulcers. Conclusions: High intensity physician staffing is associated with increased use of evidence-based quality indictors in patients receiving mechanical ventilation.
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。
推荐
暂无数据