25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      A randomized trial of nighttime physician staffing in an intensive care unit.

      The New England journal of medicine
      Aged, Female, Hospital Mortality, Hospitalists, Hospitals, University, Humans, Intensive Care Units, manpower, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Length of Stay, Male, Middle Aged, Pennsylvania, Personnel Staffing and Scheduling

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Increasing numbers of intensive care units (ICUs) are adopting the practice of nighttime intensivist staffing despite the lack of experimental evidence of its effectiveness. We conducted a 1-year randomized trial in an academic medical ICU of the effects of nighttime staffing with in-hospital intensivists (intervention) as compared with nighttime coverage by daytime intensivists who were available for consultation by telephone (control). We randomly assigned blocks of 7 consecutive nights to the intervention or the control strategy. The primary outcome was patients' length of stay in the ICU. Secondary outcomes were patients' length of stay in the hospital, ICU and in-hospital mortality, discharge disposition, and rates of readmission to the ICU. For length-of-stay outcomes, we performed time-to-event analyses, with data censored at the time of a patient's death or transfer to another ICU. A total of 1598 patients were included in the analyses. The median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III score (in which scores range from 0 to 299, with higher scores indicating more severe illness) was 67 (interquartile range, 47 to 91), the median length of stay in the ICU was 52.7 hours (interquartile range, 29.0 to 113.4), and mortality in the ICU was 18%. Patients who were admitted on intervention days were exposed to nighttime intensivists on more nights than were patients admitted on control days (median, 100% of nights [interquartile range, 67 to 100] vs. median, 0% [interquartile range, 0 to 33]; P<0.001). Nonetheless, intensivist staffing on the night of admission did not have a significant effect on the length of stay in the ICU (rate ratio for the time to ICU discharge, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88 to 1.09; P=0.72), ICU mortality (relative risk, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.28), or any other end point. Analyses restricted to patients who were admitted at night showed similar results, as did sensitivity analyses that used different definitions of exposure and outcome. In an academic medical ICU in the United States, nighttime in-hospital intensivist staffing did not improve patient outcomes. (Funded by University of Pennsylvania Health System and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01434823.).

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The APACHE III Prognostic System

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Physician Staffing Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              "July effect": impact of the academic year-end changeover on patient outcomes: a systematic review.

              It is commonly believed that the quality of health care decreases during trainee changeovers at the end of the academic year. To systematically review studies describing the effects of trainee changeover on patient outcomes. Electronic literature search of PubMed, Educational Research Information Center (ERIC), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for English-language studies published between 1989 and July 2010. Title and abstract review followed by full-text review to identify studies that assessed the effect of the changeover on patient outcomes and that used a control group or period as a comparator. Using a standardized form, 2 authors independently abstracted data on outcomes, study setting and design, and statistical methods. Differences between reviewers were reconciled by consensus. Studies were then categorized according to methodological quality, sample size, and outcomes reported. Of the 39 included studies, 27 (69%) reported mortality, 19 (49%) reported efficiency (length of stay, duration of procedure, hospital charges), 23 (59%) reported morbidity, and 6 (15%) reported medical error outcomes; all studies focused on inpatient settings. Most studies were conducted in the United States. Thirteen (33%) were of higher quality. Studies with higher-quality designs and larger sample sizes more often showed increased mortality and decreased efficiency at time of changeover. Studies examining morbidity and medical error outcomes were of lower quality and produced inconsistent results. The review was limited to English-language reports. No study focused on the effect of changeovers in ambulatory care settings. The definition of changeover, resident role in patient care, and supervision structure varied considerably among studies. Most studies did not control for time trends or level of supervision or use methods appropriate for hierarchical data. Mortality increases and efficiency decreases in hospitals because of year-end changeovers, although heterogeneity in the existing literature does not permit firm conclusions about the degree of risk posed, how changeover affects morbidity and rates of medical errors, or whether particular models are more or less problematic. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Comments

                Comment on this article