Nguyen Claude, Mir Osman, Vahidy Farhaan, Wu Tzu-Ching, Albright Karen, Boehme Amelia, Delgado Rigoberto, Savitz Sean
Department of Neurology, University of Texas-Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Birmingham VA Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015 Dec;24(12):2866-74. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2015.08.023. Epub 2015 Oct 12.
As a comprehensive stroke center (CSC), we accept transfer patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) in our region. CSC guidelines mandate receipt of patients with ICH for higher level of care. We determined resource utilization of patients accepted from outside hospitals compared with patients directly arriving to our center.
From our stroke registry, we compared patients with primary ICH transferred to those directly arriving to our CSC from March 2011-March 2012. We compared the proportion of patients who utilized at least one of these resources: neurointensive care unit (NICU), neurosurgical intervention, or clinical trial enrollment.
Among the 362 patients, 210 (58%) were transfers. Transferred patients were older, had higher median Glasgow Coma Scale scores, and lower National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores than directly admitted patients. Transfers had smaller median ICH volumes (20.5 cc versus 15.2 cc; P = .04) and lower ICH scores (2.1 ± 1.4 versus 1.6 ± 1.3; P < .01). A smaller proportion of transfers utilized CSC-specific resources compared with direct admits (P = .02). Fewer transferred patients required neurosurgical intervention or were enrolled in trials. No significant difference was found in the proportion of patients who used NICU resources, although transferred patients had a significantly lower length of stay in the NICU. Average hospital stay costs were less for transferred patients than for direct admits.
Patients with ICH transferred to our CSC underwent fewer neurosurgical procedures and had a shorter stay in the NICU. These results were reflected in the lower per-patient costs in the transferred group. Our results raise the need to analyze cost-benefits and resource utilization of transferring patients with milder ICH.
作为一家综合卒中中心(CSC),我们接收本地区脑出血(ICH)的转诊患者。CSC指南要求接收ICH患者以提供更高水平的治疗。我们比较了从外部医院接收的患者与直接到我们中心就诊的患者的资源利用情况。
从我们的卒中登记系统中,我们比较了2011年3月至2012年3月间转诊至我们CSC的原发性ICH患者与直接到我们CSC就诊的患者。我们比较了至少使用以下一种资源的患者比例:神经重症监护病房(NICU)、神经外科干预或临床试验入组。
在362例患者中,210例(58%)为转诊患者。转诊患者比直接入院患者年龄更大,格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分中位数更高,美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分更低。转诊患者的脑出血体积中位数更小(20.5立方厘米对15.2立方厘米;P = 0.04),脑出血评分更低(2.1±1.4对1.6±1.3;P < 0.01)。与直接入院患者相比,转诊患者使用CSC特定资源的比例更小(P = 0.02)。需要神经外科干预或参加试验的转诊患者更少。使用NICU资源的患者比例没有显著差异,尽管转诊患者在NICU的住院时间显著更短。转诊患者的平均住院费用低于直接入院患者。
转诊至我们CSC的ICH患者接受的神经外科手术更少,在NICU的住院时间更短。这些结果反映在转诊组较低的人均费用上。我们的结果表明有必要分析转诊病情较轻的ICH患者的成本效益和资源利用情况。