Center for Medical Decision Making, Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Neurosurgery, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Drie Eikenstraat 655, 2650, Antwerp, Belgium.
Neurocrit Care. 2022 Jun;36(3):846-856. doi: 10.1007/s12028-021-01386-y. Epub 2021 Dec 6.
In traumatic brain injury (TBI), large between-center differences in treatment and outcome for patients managed in the intensive care unit (ICU) have been shown. The aim of this study is to explore if European neurotrauma centers can be clustered, based on their treatment preference in different domains of TBI care in the ICU.
Provider profiles of centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI study were used to assess correlations within and between the predefined domains: intracranial pressure monitoring, coagulation and transfusion, surgery, prophylactic antibiotics, and more general ICU treatment policies. Hierarchical clustering using Ward's minimum variance method was applied to group data with the highest similarity. Heat maps were used to visualize whether hospitals could be grouped to uncover types of hospitals adhering to certain treatment strategies.
Provider profiles were available from 66 centers in 20 different countries in Europe and Israel. Correlations within most of the predefined domains varied from low to high correlations (mean correlation coefficients 0.2-0.7). Correlations between domains were lower, with mean correlation coefficients of 0.2. Cluster analysis showed that policies could be grouped, but hospitals could not be grouped based on their preference.
Although correlations between treatment policies within domains were found, the failure to cluster hospitals indicates that a specific treatment choice within a domain is not a proxy for other treatment choices within or outside the domain. These results imply that studying the effects of specific TBI interventions on outcome can be based on between-center variation without being substantially confounded by other treatments.
We do not report the results of a health care intervention.
在创伤性脑损伤(TBI)中,重症监护病房(ICU)中患者的治疗和预后存在较大的中心间差异。本研究旨在探索欧洲神经创伤中心是否可以根据其在 ICU 中 TBI 治疗不同领域的治疗偏好进行聚类。
使用参与协作性欧洲神经创伤功效研究 TBI 研究的中心的提供者档案来评估预定义领域内和之间的相关性:颅内压监测、凝血和输血、手术、预防性抗生素以及更一般的 ICU 治疗政策。使用 Ward 最小方差法的层次聚类用于对具有最高相似度的数据进行分组。热图用于可视化医院是否可以分组以揭示遵循某些治疗策略的医院类型。
来自欧洲和以色列的 20 个不同国家的 66 个中心提供了提供者档案。大多数预定义领域内的相关性从低到高(平均相关系数 0.2-0.7)。领域之间的相关性较低,平均相关系数为 0.2。聚类分析表明可以对政策进行分组,但不能根据医院的偏好对医院进行分组。
尽管在域内的治疗政策之间发现了相关性,但未能对医院进行聚类表明,特定域内的特定治疗选择不是该域内或外部其他治疗选择的代理。这些结果表明,研究特定 TBI 干预措施对结果的影响可以基于中心间的差异,而不会受到其他治疗的实质性混淆。
我们不报告医疗干预措施的结果。