Ramnath Venktesh R, Ho Lawrence, Maggio Lauren A, Khazeni Nayer
1 Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center , Stanford, California.
Telemed J E Health. 2014 Oct;20(10):936-61. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2013.0352. Epub 2014 Sep 16.
Increasing intensivist shortages and demand coupled with the escalating cost of care have created enthusiasm for intensive care unit (ICU)-based telemedicine ("tele-ICU"). This systematic literature review compares the Centralized Monitoring and Virtual Consultant tele-ICU Models.
With an experienced medical reference librarian, we identified all language publications addressing the employment and efficacy of the centralized monitoring and virtual consultant tele-ICU systems through PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science. We performed quantitative and qualitative reviews of documents regarding financial sustainability, clinical outcomes, and ICU staff workflow and acceptance.
Of 1,468 documents identified, 1,371 documents were excluded, with the remaining 91 documents addressing clinical outcomes (46 documents [enhanced guideline compliance, 5; mortality and length of stay, 28; and feasibility, 13]), financial sustainability (9 documents), and ICU staff workflow and acceptance (36 documents). Quantitative review showed that studies evaluating the Centralized Monitoring Model were twice as frequent, with a mean of 4,891 patients in an average of six ICUs; Virtual Consultant Model studies enrolled a mean of 372 patients in an average of one ICU. Ninety-two percent of feasibility studies evaluated the Virtual Consultant Model, of which 50% were in the last 3 years. Qualitative review largely confirmed findings in previous studies of centralized monitoring systems. Both the Centralized Monitoring and Virtual Consultant Models showed clinical practice adherence improvement. Although definitive evaluation was not possible given lack of data, the Virtual Consultant Model generally indicated lean absolute cost profile in contrast to centralized monitoring systems.
Compared with the Virtual Consultant tele-ICU Model, studies addressing the Centralized Monitoring Model of tele-ICU care were greater in quantity and sample size, with qualitative conclusions of clinical outcomes, staff satisfaction and workload, and financial sustainability largely consistent with past systematic reviews. Attention should be focused on performing more high-quality studies to allow for equitable comparisons between both models.
重症监护医生短缺情况日益严重,需求不断增加,同时护理成本不断攀升,这使得基于重症监护病房(ICU)的远程医疗(“远程ICU”)备受关注。本系统文献综述对集中监测和虚拟会诊远程ICU模式进行了比较。
我们与一位经验丰富的医学参考馆员合作,通过PubMed、CINAHL和Web of Science检索了所有涉及集中监测和虚拟会诊远程ICU系统的应用及效果的语言出版物。我们对有关财务可持续性、临床结果以及ICU工作人员工作流程和接受度的文献进行了定量和定性综述。
在检索到的1468篇文献中,排除了1371篇,其余91篇文献涉及临床结果(46篇[强化指南依从性,5篇;死亡率和住院时间,28篇;可行性,13篇])、财务可持续性(9篇)以及ICU工作人员工作流程和接受度(36篇)。定量综述显示,评估集中监测模式的研究频率是评估虚拟会诊模式的两倍,平均六个ICU中有4891名患者;虚拟会诊模式研究平均每个ICU纳入372名患者。92%的可行性研究评估了虚拟会诊模式,其中50%是在过去3年进行的。定性综述在很大程度上证实了先前关于集中监测系统研究的结果。集中监测和虚拟会诊模式均显示临床实践依从性有所提高。尽管由于缺乏数据无法进行确定性评估,但与集中监测系统相比,虚拟会诊模式总体上显示出绝对成本较低。
与虚拟会诊远程ICU模式相比,关于远程ICU护理集中监测模式的研究在数量和样本量上更多,临床结果、工作人员满意度和工作量以及财务可持续性的定性结论与过去的系统综述基本一致。应集中精力开展更多高质量研究,以便对两种模式进行公平比较。