Department of Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre - Calgary AB, T2N 2T9, Canada.
Crit Care. 2009;13(6):R209. doi: 10.1186/cc8227. Epub 2009 Dec 29.
Current evidence regarding whether the staffing of intensive care units (ICUs) with a trained Intensivist benefits patient outcomes is discordant. We sought to determine whether, among certified Intensivists, base specialty of training could contribute to variation in practice patterns and patient outcomes in ICUs.
The records of all patients who were admitted to one of three closed multi-system ICUs within tertiary care centers in the Calgary Health Region, Alberta, Canada, during a five year period were retrospectively reviewed. Outcomes for patients admitted by Intensivists with base training in General Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Medicine, or other eligible base specialties (Anesthesia, General Surgery, and Emergency Medicine combined) were compared.
ICU mortality in the entire cohort (n = 9,808) was 17.2% and in-hospital mortality was 32.0%. After controlling for potential confounders, ICU mortality (odds ratio (OR): 0.69; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52 to 0.94) was significantly lower for patients admitted by Intensivists with Pulmonary Medicine as a base specialty of training, but not ICU length of stay (LOS) (coefficient: 0.11; -0.20 to 0.42) or hospital mortality (OR: 0.88; 0.68 to 1.13). There was no difference in ICU or hospital mortality or length of stay between the three base specialty groups for patients who were admitted and managed by a single Intensivist for their entire ICU admission (n = 4,612). However, we identified significant variation in practice patterns between the three specialty groups for the number of invasive procedures performed and decisions to limit life-sustaining therapies.
Intensivists' base specialty of training is associated with practice pattern variations. This may contribute to differences in processes and outcomes of patient care.
目前关于重症监护病房(ICU)配备经过培训的重症医学专家是否有益于患者预后的证据存在差异。我们试图确定,在经过认证的重症医学专家中,其基础专业培训是否会导致 ICU 实践模式和患者预后的差异。
回顾性分析了在加拿大阿尔伯塔省卡尔加里健康区的三个三级护理中心的封闭式多系统 ICU 中,在五年期间入住的所有患者的记录。比较了接受普通内科、呼吸内科或其他合格基础专业(麻醉科、普通外科和急诊医学)培训的基础培训的重症医学专家收治的患者的 ICU 死亡率和院内死亡率。
整个队列(n=9808)的 ICU 死亡率为 17.2%,院内死亡率为 32.0%。在控制了潜在的混杂因素后,接受呼吸内科为基础专业培训的重症医学专家收治的患者的 ICU 死亡率(优势比(OR):0.69;95%置信区间(CI):0.52 至 0.94)显著降低,但 ICU 住院时间(系数:0.11;-0.20 至 0.42)或院内死亡率(OR:0.88;0.68 至 1.13)无差异。对于由单个重症医学专家在整个 ICU 住院期间收治和管理的患者,三个基础专业组在 ICU 和院内死亡率或住院时间方面没有差异(n=4612)。然而,我们发现,在进行侵入性操作的数量和决定限制生命支持治疗方面,三个专业组之间存在显著的实践模式差异。
重症医学专家的基础专业培训与实践模式的变化有关。这可能导致患者护理过程和结果的差异。