Goettler Claudia E, Waibel Brett H, Goodwin Joel, Watkins Frank, Toschlog Eric A, Sagraves Scott G, Schenarts Paul J, Bard Michael R, Newell Mark A, Rotondo Michael F
Department of Surgery, Center of Excellence for Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA.
J Trauma. 2010 Jun;68(6):1279-87; discussion 1287-8. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181de3b99.
Resource utilization in medicine is becoming a more and more urgent issue with ongoing national discussions on healthcare coverage. In the management of a trauma system, large amounts of resources and money are expended on individual patients in hope of a "great save." In addition, those of us caring for these patients are required to estimate outcomes daily to the family in an effort to choose the best course of care for an individual patient. Hence, we undertook a study to analyze the accuracy of outcomes predictions of various members of the healthcare team.
During a period of 38 months (July 2005 to August 2008), an observational study of patients admitted to a Level I Trauma Center Intensive Care Unit (ICU) was undertaken. Institutional Review Board permission was obtained before starting the study. Only patients older than 18 years were included. Patients who were moribund or expected discharge within 72 hours were excluded.Our traumatized ICU patients are cared for by a multidisciplinary team consisting of a trauma/ICU attending, all of whom have additional certification in surgical critical care and who rotate through the ICU on a weekly basis, a surgical ICU fellow, residents and medical students of several levels of training who rotate on a monthly basis, trauma advanced-level practitioners who rotate weekly, and bedside ICU nurses who work routine shifts. Respiratory therapists, nutritionists, ICU pharmacists, and other members of the rounding team were not included in the study because they do not provide global patient care. Regardless of admitting physician, the patients are managed by the team, and our practice of care is similar across the group, based on protocols and consensus.For each of the study patients, a survey tool was filled out by the ICU rounding team on hospital day 1 and hospital day 3. The tool was completed by members of the team providing global care to the patient and varied depending on the members of the group at each day's rounds. All current and admission data on injuries, study and laboratory results, and current patient status were available to all members of the team. Each member was expected to fill out the survey tool independently, and the results of the tool were not discussed during rounds.Concurrently, data were collected by the ICU fellow and research nurse. These data and the results of the survey tools were entered in a database for analysis after patient discharge. A retrospective analysis was undertaken to analyze the relative accuracy of the care, team members' assessment, and actual survival. Statistical analysis was done using by-chance accuracy comparisons.
Two hundred twenty-three patients had 326 observations performed. Day 3 accuracy improved for most groups. In all groups, accuracy was found to be statistically significantly better than by-chance accuracy. Given that the majority of patients in the trauma population are survivors, sensitivity and positive predictive value of the observer's ability to predict death were also evaluated.
Although significantly better than chance prediction, the ability of members of the ICU team to predict survival of trauma patients remains poor, particularly on initial evaluation. A period of clinical observation improves the accuracy. Unfortunately, experience of the observer does not seem to improve accuracy of survival prediction. This data indicate that care must be taken when describing likely outcomes to patient family members.
随着全国范围内关于医疗保健覆盖范围的讨论不断进行,医学领域的资源利用问题变得越来越紧迫。在创伤系统的管理中,大量资源和资金被用于个体患者,以期实现“成功救治”。此外,我们这些照顾这些患者的人每天都需要向家属预估治疗结果,以便为个体患者选择最佳的治疗方案。因此,我们开展了一项研究,以分析医疗团队各成员对治疗结果预测的准确性。
在38个月的时间里(2005年7月至2008年8月),对入住一级创伤中心重症监护病房(ICU)的患者进行了一项观察性研究。在研究开始前获得了机构审查委员会的许可。仅纳入年龄超过18岁的患者。濒死或预计在72小时内出院的患者被排除。我们创伤ICU患者由一个多学科团队护理,该团队包括一名创伤/ICU主治医生,他们都拥有外科重症监护的额外认证且每周在ICU轮转;一名外科ICU专科住院医生;不同培训水平的住院医师和医学生,他们每月轮转;每周轮转的创伤高级执业医师;以及常规轮班的床边ICU护士。呼吸治疗师、营养师、ICU药剂师和查房团队的其他成员未纳入研究,因为他们不提供全面的患者护理。无论收治医生是谁,患者均由该团队管理,并且基于方案和共识,我们的护理实践在整个组中是相似的。对于每位研究患者,ICU查房团队在住院第1天和住院第3天填写一份调查工具。该工具由为患者提供全面护理的团队成员完成,并且根据每天查房时的团队成员不同而有所变化。团队所有成员均可获取所有当前和入院时的损伤数据、检查和实验室结果以及当前患者状态。每位成员需独立填写调查工具表格,且在查房期间不讨论该工具的结果。
同时,ICU专科住院医生和研究护士收集数据。这些数据以及调查工具的结果在患者出院后输入数据库进行分析。进行了一项回顾性分析,以分析护理的相对准确性、团队成员的评估以及实际生存率。使用偶然准确性比较进行统计分析。
223例患者共进行了326次观察。大多数组在第3天的准确性有所提高。在所有组中,发现准确性在统计学上显著优于偶然准确性。鉴于创伤患者群体中的大多数是幸存者,还评估了观察者预测死亡能力的敏感性和阳性预测值。
尽管ICU团队成员预测创伤患者生存的能力明显优于偶然预测,但仍然较差,尤其是在初始评估时。一段临床观察期可提高准确性。不幸的是,观察者的经验似乎并未提高生存预测的准确性。这些数据表明,在向患者家属描述可能的治疗结果时必须谨慎。