Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Neurology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
JAMA Neurol. 2022 Oct 1;79(10):1049-1058. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.2456.
Neurocritical care (NCC) aims to improve the outcomes of critically ill patients with brain injury, although the benefits of such subspecialized care are yet to be determined.
To evaluate the association of NCC with patient-centered outcomes in adults with acute brain injury who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). The protocol was preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42020177190).
Three electronic databases were searched (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from inception through December 15, 2021, and by citation chaining.
Studies were included for interventions of neurocritical care units (NCCUs), neurointensivists, or NCC consulting services compared with general care in populations of neurologically ill adults or adults with acute brain injury in ICUs.
Data extraction was performed in keeping with PRISMA guidelines and risk of bias assessed through the ROBINS-I Cochrane tool by 2 independent reviewers. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at longest follow-up until 6 months. Secondary outcomes were ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and functional outcomes. Data were measured as risk ratio (RR) if dichotomous or standardized mean difference if continuous. Subgroup analyses were performed for disease and models of NCC delivery.
After 5659 nonduplicated published records were screened, 26 nonrandomized observational studies fulfilled eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis of mortality outcomes for 55 792 patients demonstrated a 17% relative risk reduction (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.92; P = .001) in those receiving subspecialized care (n = 27 061) compared with general care (n = 27 694). Subgroup analyses did not identify subgroup differences. Eight studies including 4667 patients demonstrated a 17% relative risk reduction (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.97; P = .03) for an unfavorable functional outcome with subspecialized care compared with general care. There were no differences in LOS outcomes. Heterogeneity was substantial in all analyses.
Subspecialized NCC is associated with improved survival and functional outcomes for critically ill adults with brain injury. However, confidence in the evidence is limited by substantial heterogeneity. Further investigations are necessary to determine the specific aspects of NCC that contribute to these improved outcomes and its cost-effectiveness.
神经重症监护(NCC)旨在改善患有脑损伤的危重病患者的预后,但这种专业化护理的益处仍有待确定。
评估 NCC 对入住重症监护病房(ICU)的急性脑损伤成年患者的以患者为中心的结局的影响。该方案已在 PROSPERO(CRD42020177190)上预先注册。
从开始到 2021 年 12 月 15 日,通过三个电子数据库(Ovid MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册)和引文连锁进行了搜索。
纳入了神经重症监护病房(NCCU)、神经科医生或 NCC 咨询服务的干预措施与一般护理在神经疾病成人或 ICU 中急性脑损伤成人中的比较。
数据提取符合 PRISMA 指南,并通过 2 位独立评审员使用 ROBINS-I Cochrane 工具评估偏倚风险。使用随机效应模型对数据进行汇总。
主要结局是最长随访至 6 个月的全因死亡率。次要结局是 ICU 住院时间(LOS)、医院 LOS 和功能结局。如果为二分类,则测量为风险比(RR),如果为连续则测量为标准化均数差。进行了疾病和 NCC 提供模型的亚组分析。
在筛选了 5659 篇非重复发表的记录后,26 项非随机观察性研究符合入选标准。对 55792 名患者的死亡率结果进行的荟萃分析表明,接受专科护理(n=27061)的患者相对风险降低 17%(RR,0.83;95%CI,0.75-0.92;P=.001),而接受一般护理(n=27694)的患者相对风险降低 17%(RR,0.83;95%CI,0.70-0.97;P=.03)。亚组分析未发现亚组差异。八项研究包括 4667 名患者的结果表明,与一般护理相比,专科护理的相对风险降低 17%(RR,0.83;95%CI,0.70-0.97;P=.03),功能结局不良。在 LOS 结局方面没有差异。所有分析的异质性都很大。
专门的 NCC 与改善患有脑损伤的危重病成年人的生存率和功能结局有关。但是,证据的可信度受到很大的异质性的限制。需要进一步研究以确定 NCC 的具体方面有助于这些改善的结果及其成本效益。