A service evaluation examining the requirement for Level 2 critical care in a major trauma centre

P. Galea, K. Joyce, Sarah Galea, F. Loughnane
{"title":"A service evaluation examining the requirement for Level 2 critical care in a major trauma centre","authors":"P. Galea, K. Joyce, Sarah Galea, F. Loughnane","doi":"10.22541/au.164175447.73916057/v1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Critical care provision is fundamental in all developed health systems\nin which severe disease and injury is managed. This is especially true\nin major trauma centres and high-acuity establishments, where acutely\nunstable patients can be admitted at any time, requiring clinical\nmonitoring and interventions appropriate for their burden of illness.\nThis single-centre, prospective service evaluation applied validated\nscoring systems to a surgical population, sampling and following those\nconsidered “high-risk” through to discharge or death, alongside all\nintensive care unit (ICU) admissions during 2019. Primarily we aimed to\nquantify the number of patients objectively suitable for Level 2\ncritical care, conventionally provided in a high-dependency unit (HDU)\nsetting. Secondary outcome measures included ICU readmission rate,\nin-hospital mortality, and delays to ICU admission and discharge. Of the\n“high-risk” surgical patients, more than eight per week were found to\nhave peri-operative Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity\nScore for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM) scores\nthat would advocate critical care admission. Only one individual\nreceived scheduled peri-operative critical care. Post-operative\nmortality in this group was 6.1%, though none of these patients was\nadmitted to ICU prior to death. There were 605 ICU admissions in 2019,\nwith 32.1% of admitted days spent at the equivalent of Level 2 critical\ncare, which could have been administered in a HDU if one was available.\nThe ICU readmission rate was 6.45%. This data demonstrates substantial\nunmet critical care needs, with patients not uncommonly managed in\nclinically inappropriate areas for extended periods due to delays\naccessing ICU. A designated HDU may mitigate clinical risk from this\nsubgroup, reducing morbidity and in-hospital mortality, and this\nmethodology for assessing requirements could be used in other similar\ninstitutions.","PeriodicalId":73881,"journal":{"name":"Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22541/au.164175447.73916057/v1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Critical care provision is fundamental in all developed health systems in which severe disease and injury is managed. This is especially true in major trauma centres and high-acuity establishments, where acutely unstable patients can be admitted at any time, requiring clinical monitoring and interventions appropriate for their burden of illness. This single-centre, prospective service evaluation applied validated scoring systems to a surgical population, sampling and following those considered “high-risk” through to discharge or death, alongside all intensive care unit (ICU) admissions during 2019. Primarily we aimed to quantify the number of patients objectively suitable for Level 2 critical care, conventionally provided in a high-dependency unit (HDU) setting. Secondary outcome measures included ICU readmission rate, in-hospital mortality, and delays to ICU admission and discharge. Of the “high-risk” surgical patients, more than eight per week were found to have peri-operative Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM) scores that would advocate critical care admission. Only one individual received scheduled peri-operative critical care. Post-operative mortality in this group was 6.1%, though none of these patients was admitted to ICU prior to death. There were 605 ICU admissions in 2019, with 32.1% of admitted days spent at the equivalent of Level 2 critical care, which could have been administered in a HDU if one was available. The ICU readmission rate was 6.45%. This data demonstrates substantial unmet critical care needs, with patients not uncommonly managed in clinically inappropriate areas for extended periods due to delays accessing ICU. A designated HDU may mitigate clinical risk from this subgroup, reducing morbidity and in-hospital mortality, and this methodology for assessing requirements could be used in other similar institutions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对大型创伤中心2级重症监护要求的服务评估
在所有管理严重疾病和伤害的发达卫生系统中,提供重症监护是至关重要的。这在主要的创伤中心和高敏锐度机构尤其如此,在那里,急性不稳定的患者可以随时入院,需要进行适合其疾病负担的临床监测和干预。这项单一中心的前瞻性服务评估将经验证的取芯系统应用于外科人群,对那些被认为“高风险”的患者进行采样和随访,直到出院或死亡,以及2019年所有重症监护室(ICU)的入院情况。我们的主要目的是量化客观上适合2级重症监护的患者数量,通常在高依赖病房(HDU)环境中提供。次要结果指标包括ICU再入院率、住院死亡率以及ICU入院和出院延迟。在“高危”手术患者中,每周有超过8名患者的朴次茅斯生理和手术严重性死亡率和发病率增加评分(P-POSSUM)支持重症监护入院。只有一个人接受了预定的围手术期重症监护。该组患者术后死亡率为6.1%,但这些患者在死亡前均未入住ICU。2019年共有605人入住重症监护室,32.1%的入住天数相当于2级重症监护,如果有HDU的话,可以在HDU中进行。ICU的再入院率为6.45%。这一数据表明,重症监护需求得到了实质性满足,患者因延迟进入ICU而长期管理倾斜不合适的区域并不罕见。指定的HDU可以减轻该亚组的临床风险,降低发病率和住院死亡率,这种评估需求的方法也可以用于其他类似的机构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Hyperlipidemia Induced Pathological Changes with no Effect in Biomechanical Properties in the Achilles Tendon of Young Swine. Chronic Adaptation of Achilles Tendon Tissues upon Injury to Rotator Cuff Tendon in Hyperlipidemic Swine. Energizing Healing with Electromagnetic Field Therapy in Musculoskeletal Disorders. Orthopedic Dermatopathies: Skin Manifestations in Orthopedic Conditions. Immunotherapeutic Strategies in the Management of Osteosarcoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1