Ofoma Uchenna R, Dahdah John, Kethireddy Shravan, Maeng Daniel, Walkey Allan J
1Department of Critical Care Medicine, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA.2Department of Internal Medicine, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA.3Department of Epidemiology and Health Services Research, Geisinger Center for Health Research, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA.4The Pulmonary Center, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA.
Crit Care Med. 2017 Apr;45(4):615-622. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002254.
Case volume-outcome associations bolster arguments to regionalize severe sepsis care, an approach that may necessitate interhospital patient transfers. Although transferred patients may most closely reflect care processes involved with regionalization, associations between sepsis case volume and outcomes among transferred patients are unclear. We investigated case volume-outcome associations among patients with severe sepsis transferred from another hospital.
Serial cross-sectional study using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.
United States nonfederal hospitals, years 2003-2011.
One hundred forty-one thousand seven hundred seven patients (weighted national estimate of 717,732) with severe sepsis transferred from another acute care hospital.
None.
We examined associations between quintiles of annual hospital severe sepsis case volume for the receiving hospital and in-hospital mortality among transferred patients with severe sepsis. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay and total charges. Transferred patients accounted for 13.2% of hospitalized severe sepsis cases. In-hospital mortality was 33.2%, with median length of stay 11 days (interquartile range, 5-22), and median total charge $70,722 (interquartile range, $30,591-$159,013). Patients transferred to highest volume hospitals had higher predicted mortality risk, greater number of acutely dysfunctional organs, and lower adjusted in-hospital mortality when compared with the lowest-volume hospitals (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67-0.90). In stratified analysis (p < 0.001 for interaction of case volume by organ failure), mortality benefit associated with case volume was limited to patients with single organ dysfunction (n = 48,607, 34.3% of transfers) (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.80). Treatment at highest volume hospitals was significantly associated with shorter adjusted length of stay (incidence rate ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.98) but not costs (% charge difference, 95% CI: [-]18.8, [-]37.9 to [+]0.3).
Hospital mortality was lowest among patients with severe sepsis who were transferred to high-volume hospitals; however, case volume benefits for transferred patients may be limited to patients with lower illness severity.
病例数量与预后的关联支持了将严重脓毒症护理进行区域化的观点,这种方法可能需要在医院间转运患者。尽管转运患者可能最能反映区域化所涉及的护理过程,但脓毒症病例数量与转运患者预后之间的关联尚不清楚。我们调查了从其他医院转运来的严重脓毒症患者的病例数量与预后的关联。
使用全国住院患者样本进行的系列横断面研究。
2003 - 2011年美国非联邦医院。
141707例从其他急性护理医院转运来的严重脓毒症患者(全国加权估计为717732例)。
无。
我们研究了接收医院每年严重脓毒症病例数量的五分位数与转运来的严重脓毒症患者院内死亡率之间的关联。次要结局包括住院时间和总费用。转运患者占住院严重脓毒症病例的13.2%。院内死亡率为33.2%,中位住院时间为11天(四分位间距,5 - 22天),中位总费用为70722美元(四分位间距,30591 - 159013美元)。与病例数量最少的医院相比,转至病例数量最多医院的患者预测死亡风险更高,急性功能障碍器官数量更多,但调整后的院内死亡率更低(比值比,0.80;95%置信区间,0.67 - 0.90)。在分层分析中(病例数量与器官衰竭的交互作用p < 0.001),病例数量与死亡率的关联仅限于单器官功能障碍患者(n = 48607,占转运患者的34.3%)(比值比,0.66;95%置信区间,0.55 - 0.80)。在病例数量最多的医院接受治疗与调整后的住院时间显著缩短相关(发病率比,0.86;95%置信区间,0.75 - 0.98),但与费用无关(费用差异百分比,95%置信区间:[-]18.8,[-]37.9至[+]0.3)。
转至病例数量多的医院的严重脓毒症患者院内死亡率最低;然而,病例数量对转运患者的益处可能仅限于病情较轻的患者。