Manthous Constantine A
Pulmonary and Critical Care, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, Connecticut 06610, USA.
Am J Med. 2004 Feb 1;116(3):188-93. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2003.08.032.
In 2000, the Business Roundtable published its Leapfrog report, which contained suggestions for improving administration of critical care. The Leapfrog Group intends to influence health care policy by pressuring insurers and hospitals to implement its guidelines, and both internists and intensivists are likely to be affected if these recommendations are realized. This article outlines the Leapfrog standards for critical care and examines critically the evidence used to justify them. Aside from the guideline that all critically ill patients should be cared for by intensivists, Leapfrog's standards for critical care are based either on weak or no scientific evidence. Rather, most of the guidelines are grounded in common sense and rational extrapolation of the data; as such, they are a reasonable starting point for debate by physicians and policymakers about optimal methods of achieving intensivist-guided care of critically ill patients.
2000年,商业圆桌会议发布了其“跳蛙”报告,其中包含了改善重症监护管理的建议。“跳蛙”组织打算通过向保险公司和医院施压以促使其实施该组织的指导方针来影响医疗保健政策,如果这些建议得以实施,内科医生和重症监护医生都可能会受到影响。本文概述了重症监护的“跳蛙”标准,并对用以证明这些标准合理性的证据进行了批判性审视。除了所有重症患者应由重症监护医生护理这一指导方针外,“跳蛙”组织的重症监护标准要么基于薄弱的科学证据,要么毫无科学证据。相反,大多数指导方针都基于常识和对数据的合理推断;因此,它们是医生和政策制定者就实现对重症患者进行重症监护医生指导护理的最佳方法展开辩论的合理起点。