Harborview Medical Center, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle Washington, USA.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011 Feb 1;183(3):348-55. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201006-1004OC. Epub 2010 Sep 10.
Because of high mortality, end-of-life care is an important component of intensive care.
We evaluated the effectiveness of a quality-improvement intervention to improve intensive care unit (ICU) end-of-life care.
We conducted a cluster-randomized trial randomizing 12 hospitals. The intervention targeted clinicians with five components: clinician education, local champions, academic detailing, clinician feedback of quality data, and system supports. Outcomes were assessed for patients dying in the ICU or within 30 hours of ICU discharge using surveys and medical record review. Families completed Quality of Dying and Death (QODD) and satisfaction surveys. Nurses completed the QODD. Data were collected during baseline and follow-up at each hospital (May 2004 to February 2008). We used robust regression models to test for intervention effects, controlling for site, patient, family, and nurse characteristics.
All hospitals completed the trial with 2,318 eligible patients and target sample sizes obtained for family and nurse surveys. The primary outcome, family-QODD, showed no change with the intervention (P = 0.33). There was no change in family satisfaction (P = 0.66) or nurse-QODD (P = 0.81). There was a nonsignificant increase in ICU days before death after the intervention (hazard ratio = 0.9; P = 0.07). Among patients undergoing withdrawal of mechanical ventilation, there was no change in time from admission to withdrawal (hazard ratio = 1.0; P = 0.81).
We found this intervention was associated with no improvement in quality of dying and no change in ICU length of stay before death or time from ICU admission to withdrawal of life-sustaining measures. Improving ICU end-of-life care will require interventions with more direct contact with patients and families. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00685893).
由于死亡率高,临终关怀是重症监护的一个重要组成部分。
我们评估了一项质量改进干预措施对改善重症监护病房(ICU)临终关怀的效果。
我们进行了一项以 12 家医院为单位的集群随机试验。该干预措施针对临床医生,包括五个组成部分:临床医生教育、当地拥护者、学术细节、临床医生质量数据反馈和系统支持。使用问卷调查和病历回顾评估在 ICU 中死亡或 ICU 出院后 30 小时内死亡的患者的结局。家属完成了死亡和濒死质量(QODD)和满意度调查。护士完成了 QODD。数据在每个医院的基线和随访期间收集(2004 年 5 月至 2008 年 2 月)。我们使用稳健回归模型来检验干预效果,控制了地点、患者、家庭和护士特征。
所有医院都完成了试验,纳入了 2318 名符合条件的患者,获得了家庭和护士调查的目标样本量。主要结局指标,家庭 QODD,干预后没有变化(P = 0.33)。家庭满意度没有变化(P = 0.66)或护士 QODD(P = 0.81)。干预后 ICU 死亡前的 ICU 天数有一个无统计学意义的增加(风险比= 0.9;P = 0.07)。在接受机械通气撤机的患者中,从入院到撤机的时间没有变化(风险比= 1.0;P = 0.81)。
我们发现,这种干预措施与死亡质量的改善无关,也没有改变 ICU 死亡前的住院时间或从 ICU 入院到停止生命支持措施的时间。改善 ICU 临终关怀需要与患者和家属有更直接接触的干预措施。该临床试验已在 www.clinicaltrials.gov 注册(NCT00685893)。