The Critical Care Resuscitation Unit Transfers More Patients From Emergency Departments Faster and Is Associated With Improved Outcomes

Association between measures of resuscitation in the critical care resuscitation unit and in-hospital mortality among patients with sepsis

Objectives

We hypothesized that lactate clearance and reduction of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score during patients' critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) stay would be associated with lower in-hospital mortality.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of adult patients who had sepsis diagnoses and were admitted to the CCRU in 2018. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association of clinical factors, lactate clearance, and SOFA reduction with hospital mortality.

Results

A total of 401 patients with lactate clearance data and 455 patients with SOFA score data were included in the study. The mean (SD) lactate and SOFA score on admission were 2.2 (1.8) mmol/L and 4.4 (4.3), respectively. Average lactate clearance was 0.1 (2.6) mmol/L, and average SOFA score reduction was 0.65 (5.9). Patients with a one point reduction in SOFA score during their CCRU stay had a 31% reduction of mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.77, p < 0.001). SOFA score reduction was associated with lower hospital mortality for both surgical patients (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.81, p < 0.001) and non-surgical patients (OR 0.71 95% CI 0.06-0.83, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

SOFA score reduction, but not lactate clearance during the CCRU stay, was associated with lower odds of in-hospital mortality. These findings suggest that resuscitative efforts leading to an early improvement in SOFA score may benefit patients with sepsis.

The Impact of the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit on Quaternary Care Accessibility for Rural Patients: A Comparative Analysis

Background

Previous research suggests that patients from rural areas who are critically ill with complex medical needs or require time-sensitive subspecialty interventions face worse healthcare outcomes and delays in care when compared to those from urban areas. The critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) at our quaternary care center was established to expedite the transfer of critically ill patients or those who need time-sensitive intervention. This study investigates if disparities exist in treatments and outcomes among patients transferred to the CCRU from rural versus urban hospitals.

Methods

This is a retrospective study of adult, nontrauma patients admitted to the CCRU via interhospital transfer from outside facilities from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Patients transferred from within our institution or with missing clinical data were excluded. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to measure the association between patients' demographic and clinical factors with in-hospital mortality.

Results

We analyzed 1381 nontrauma patients, and 484 (35%) were from rural areas. Median age was 59 [47-69], and 629 (46%) were female. Median sequential organ failure assessment was 3 ([1-6], p=0.062) for both patients transferred from urban and rural hospitals. There was no significant difference between groups with respect to most demographic and clinical factors, as well as types of interventions after CCRU arrival, including emergent surgical interventions within 12 hours of arrival at the CCRU. Rural patients were more likely to be transferred for care by the acute care emergency surgery service than were patients from urban areas and were transferred over a significantly greater distance (difference of 53 kilometers (km), 95% CI: -58.9-51.7 km, P < 0.001). Transfer from rural areas was not associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.60, 1.36; P=0.63).

Conclusion

Thirty-five percent of patients transferred to the CCRU came from rural areas, which house 25% of the state population of Maryland. Patients transferred from rural counties to the CCRU faced greater transport distances, but they received the same level of care upon arrival at the CCRU and had the same odds of in-hospital mortality as patients transferred from urban hospitals.

Air or Ground Transport to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit: Does It Really Matter?

OBJECTIVE

Critically ill patients requiring urgent interventions or subspecialty care often require transport over significant distances to tertiary care centers. The optimal method of transportation (air vs. ground) is unknown. We investigated whether air transport was associated with lower mortality for patients being transferred to a specialized critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU).

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all adult patients transferred to the CCRU at the University of Maryland Medical Center in 2018. Our primary outcome was hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included the length of stay and the time to the operating room (OR) for patients undergoing urgent procedures. We performed optimal 1:2 propensity score matching for each patient's need for air transport.

RESULTS

We matched 198 patients transported by air to 382 patients transported by ground. There was no significant difference between demographics, the initial Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, or hospital outcomes between groups. One hundred sixty-four (83%) of the patients transported via air survived to hospital discharge compared with 307 (80%) of those transported by ground (P = .46). Patients transported via air arrived at the CCRU more quickly (127 [100-178] vs. 223 [144-332] minutes, P < .001) and were more likely (60 patients, 30%) to undergo urgent surgical operation within 12 hours of CCRU arrival (30% vs. 17%, P < .001). For patients taken to the OR within 12 hours of arriving at the CCRU, patients transported by air were more likely to go to the OR after 200 minutes since the transfer request (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The transportation mode used to facilitate interfacility transfer was not significantly associated with hospital mortality or the length of stay for critically ill patients.

Direct Discharge from the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit: Results from a Longitudinal Assessment

Background

The critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) facilitates interhospital transfer (IHT) of critically ill patients for immediate interventions. Due to these patients' acuity, it is uncommon for patients to be directly discharged home from this unit, but it does happen on occasion. Since there is no literature regarding outcomes of patients being discharged from a resuscitation unit, our study investigated these patients' outcome at greater than 12 months after being discharged directly from the CCRU.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients directly discharged from the CCRU between January 01, 2017, and December 31, 2020. The primary outcome was number of ED visits or hospitalizations within 6 months. Secondary outcomes were number of ED visits or hospitalizations within 6, 12, and >12 months from CCRU discharge.

Results

We analyzed 145 patients' records. Mean age was 56 (standard deviation [SD] ± 19), with a majority being male (72%) and Caucasian (58%). The most common discharge destination was home (139 patients, 96% of total subjects) versus hospice (2%) or nursing facilities (2%). Most patients (55%) did not have any hospital revisits within the first 6 months of discharge, while 31% had 1-2 revisits, and 14% had ≥3 revisits. The most common discharge diagnoses were soft tissue infection (16.5%), aortic dissection (14%), and stroke (11%). Factors which were associated with a greater likelihood of any return hospital visit within 6 months receiving mechanical ventilation during CCRU stay (coefficient -2.23, 95% CI 0.01-0.87, P=0.036), while high hemoglobin on CCRU discharge was associated with no ED revisit (coeff. 0.42, 95% CI 1.15-2.06, P=0.004).

Conclusions

Most patients who were discharged from the CCRU did not require any hospital revisits in the first 6 months. Requiring mechanical ventilation and having soft tissue infection were associated with high unplanned hospital revisits following discharge. Further research is needed to validate these findings.

Delayed Transfer of Critically Ill Patients from Emergency Department to Intensive Care Unit

Background and aim

Delay in the transfer of critically ill patients from the emergency department (ED) to intensive care units (ICUs) may worsen clinical outcomes. This prospective, observational study was done to find the incidence of delayed transfer.

Materials and methods

After approval from the institute ethics committee and written informed consent, all patients admitted to ICU from ED over 6 months were divided into groups I and II as patients getting transferred to ICU within 30 minutes of the decision or not, respectively. The factors affecting the immediate transfer and clinical outcome of all patients were noted. Monthly feedback was given to the ED team.

Results

Out of 52 ICU admissions from ED, 35 (67.3%) patients were not transferred within 30 minutes, and the most frequent factor preventing immediate transfer was ED-related (54%). A statistically significant difference was found in acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) score, clinical deterioration during transfer, longer duration of mechanical ventilation and length of stay, and higher mortality with patients transferred immediately to ICU. A reduction of 42.6% was noted in transfer time from the first month to the last month of study.

Conclusion

The incidence of delayed transfer of patients from ED to ICU was 67.3% with ED-related factors being the most frequent cause of delay (54.2%).

How to cite this article

Bosco S, Sahni N, Jain A, Arora P, Raj V, Yaddanapudi L. Delayed Transfer of Critically Ill Patients from Emergency Department to Intensive Care Unit. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(8):580-582.

Comments on "Economic Evaluation of Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheter Confirmation vs Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Labor Cost Model"

n/a

Is the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit Sustainable: A 5-Year Experience of a Beneficial and Novel Model

Background. The 6-bed critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) is a unique and specialized intensive care unit (ICU) that streamlines the interhospital transfer (IHT—transfer between different hospitals) process for a wide range of patients with critical illness or time-sensitive disease. Previous studies showed the unit successfully increased the number of ICU admissions while reducing the time of transfer in the first year of its establishment. However, its sustainability is unknown. Methods. This was a descriptive retrospective analysis of adult, non-trauma patients who were transferred to an 800-bed quaternary medical center. Patients transferred to our medical center between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2018 were eligible. We used interrupted time series (ITS) and descriptive analyses to describe the trend and compare the transfer process between patients who were transferred to the CCRU versus those transferred to other adult inpatient units. Results. From 2014 to 2018, 50,599 patients were transferred to our medical center; 31,582 (62%) were non-trauma adults. Compared with the year prior to the opening of the CCRU, ITS showed a significant increase in IHT after the establishment of the CCRU. The CCRU received a total of 7,788 (25%) IHTs during this period or approximately 20% of total transfers per year. Most transfers (41%) occurred via ground. Median and interquartile range [IQR] of transfer times to other ICUs (156 [65–1027] minutes) were longer than the CCRU (46 [22–139] minutes, $P<0.001$ ). For the CCRU, the most common accepting services were cardiac surgery (16%), neurosurgery (11%), and emergency general surgery (10%). Conclusions. The CCRU increases the overall number of transfers to our institution, improves patient access to specialty care while decreasing transfer time, and continues to be a sustainable model over time. Additional research is needed to determine if transferring patients to the CCRU would continue to improve patients’ outcomes and hospital revenue.

Predicting Outcomes for Interhospital Transferred Patients of Emergency General Surgery

Background. Interhospital transferred (IHT) emergency general surgery (EGS) patients are associated with high care intensity and mortality. However, prior studies do not focus on patient-level data. Our study, using each IHT patient’s data, aimed to understand the underlying cause for IHT EGS patients’ outcomes. We hypothesized that transfer origin of EGS patients impacts outcomes due to critical illness as indicated by higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and disease severity. Materials and Methods. We conducted a retrospective analysis of all adult patients transferred to our quaternary academic center’s EGS service from 01/2014 to 12/2016. Only patients transferred to our hospital with EGS service as the primary service were eligible. We used multivariable logistic regression and probit analysis to measure the association of patients’ clinical factors and their outcomes (mortality and survivors’ hospital length of stay [HLOS]). Results. We analyzed 708 patients, 280 (39%) from an ICU, 175 (25%) from an ED, and 253 (36%) from a surgical ward. Compared to ED patients, patients transferred from the ICU had higher mean (SD) SOFA score (5.7 (4.5) vs. 2.39 (2), $P<0.001$ ), longer HLOS, and higher mortality. Transferring from ICU (OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.36–6.41, $P=0.006$ ), requiring laparotomy (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.04–3.70, $P=0.039$ ), and SOFA score (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.13–1.32, $P<0.001$ ) were associated with higher mortality. Conclusions. At our academic center, patients transferred from an ICU were more critically ill and had longer HLOS and higher mortality. We identified SOFA score and a few conditions and diagnoses as associated with patients’ outcomes. Further studies are needed to confirm our observation.

Effect of a Prioritization Score on the Inter-Hospital Transfer Time Management of Severe COVID-19 Patients. A Quasi-Experimental Intervention Study

Background

The overburdening of the healthcare system during the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic is driving the need to create new tools to improve the management of inter-hospital transport for patients with a severe COVID-19 infection.

Objective

The aim of this study was to analyse the usefulness of the application of a prioritization score (IHTCOVID-19) for inter-hospital transfer of patients with COVID-19 infection.

Methods

The study has a quasi-experimental design and was conducted on the Medical Emergency System, the pre-hospital emergency department of the public company belonging to the Autonomous Government of Catalonia that manages urgent healthcare in the region. Patients with a severe COVID-19 infection requiring inter-hospital transport were consecutively included. The pre-intervention period was from 1 to 31 March 2020, and the intervention period with the IHTCOVID-19 score was from 1 to 30 April 2020 (from 8 am to 8 pm). The prioritization score comprises four priority categories, with Priority 0 being the highest and Priority 3 being the lowest. Inter-hospital transfer (IHT) management times (alert-assignment time, resource management time and total central management time) and their variability were evaluated according to whether or not the IHTCOVID-19 score was applied.

Results

A total of 344 IHTs were included: 189 (54.9%) in the pre-intervention period and 155 (45.1%) in the post-intervention period. The majority of patients were male and the most frequent age range was between 50 and 70 years. According to the IHTCOVID-19 score, 12 (3.5%) transfers were classified as Priority 0, 66 (19.4%) as Priority 1, 247 (71.8%) as Priority 2 and 19 (5.6%) as Priority 3. Overall, with the application of the IHTCOVID-19 score, there was a significant reduction in total central management time [from 112.4 (inter-quartile range (IQR) 281.3) to 89.8 min (IQR 154.9); P = 0.012]. This significant reduction was observed in Priority 0 patients [286.2 (IQR 218.5) to 42.0 min (IQR 58); P = 0.018] and Priority 1 patients [130.3 (IQR 297.3) to 75.4 min (IQR 91.1); P = 0.034]. After applying the IHTCOVID-19 score, the average time of the process decreased by 22.6 min, and variability was reduced from 618.1 to 324.0 min.

Conclusion

The application of the IHTCOVID-19 score in patients with a severe COVID-19 infection reduces IHT management times and variability.

Regionalization of Critical Care in the United States: Current State and Proposed Framework From the Academic Leaders in Critical Care Medicine Task Force of the Society of the Critical Care Medicine

OBJECTIVES

The Society of Critical Care Medicine convened its Academic Leaders in Critical Care Medicine taskforce on February 22, 2016, during the 45th Critical Care Congress to develop a series of consensus papers with toolkits for advancing critical care organizations in North America. The goal of this article is to propose a framework based on the expert opinions of critical care organization leaders and their responses to a survey, for current and future critical care organizations, and their leadership in the health system to design and implement successful regionalization for critical care in their regions.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Members of the workgroup convened monthly via teleconference with the following objectives: to 1) develop and analyze a regionalization survey tool for 23 identified critical care organizations in the United States, 2) assemble relevant medical literature accessed using Medline search, 3) use a consensus of expert opinions to propose the framework, and 4) create groups to write the subsections and assemble the final product.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The most prevalent challenges for regionalization in critical care organizations remain a lack of a strong central authority to regulate and manage the system as well as a lack of necessary infrastructure, as described more than a decade ago. We provide a framework and outline a nontechnical approach that the health system and their critical care medicine leadership can adopt after considering their own structure, complexity, business operations, culture, and the relationships among their individual hospitals. Transforming the current state of regionalization into a coordinated, accountable system requires a critical assessment of administrative and clinical challenges and barriers. Systems thinking, business planning and control, and essential infrastructure development are critical for assisting critical care organizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Under the value-based paradigm, the goals are operational efficiency and patient outcomes. Health systems that can align strategy and operations to assist the referral hospitals with implementing regionalization will be better positioned to regionalize critical care effectively.

Blood pressure management in emergency department patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage

INTRODUCTION

Despite the well documented importance of blood pressure management in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), little is known about whether emergency departments (EDs) are able to achieve close monitoring and precise management. Our study characterizes ED monitoring and management of blood pressure in sICH patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of adults with sICH and elevated intracranial pressure. Patients who were admitted from any referring ED to our CCRU from 1 August 2013 to 30 September 2015 were included. We graphically assessed the association between average minutes between blood pressure measurements and average minutes between administration of antihypertensives. We also performed logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with close blood pressure monitoring and the achievement of goal blood pressure in patients with sICH who presented with hypertension.

RESULTS

Of 115 patients, 73 presented to the ED with SBP above 160 mmHg. Length of stay in the ED was significantly associated with a longer period between blood pressure measurements. Longer periods between blood pressure measurements were a significant determinant of failure to achieve blood pressure goal in sICH patients. Longer periods between blood pressure measurements were significantly associated with longer periods between administration of antihypertensives.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that blood pressure monitoring is related to the frequency of blood pressure interventions and achievement of adequate blood pressure control in patients with sICH. There is significant variability in EDs' achievement of the recommended close blood pressure monitoring and management in patients with sICH.

Transfer of Patients with Spontaneous Intracranial Hemorrhage who Need External Ventricular Drain: Does Admission Location Matter?

INTRODUCTION

Patients with spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) are associated with high mortality and require early neurosurgical interventions. At our academic referral center, the neurocritical care unit (NCCU) receives patients directly from referring facilities. However, when no NCCU bed is immediately available, patients are initially admitted to the critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU). We hypothesized that the CCRU expedites transfer of sICH patients and facilitates timely external ventricular drain (EVD) placement comparable to the NCCU.

METHODS

This is a pre-post study of adult patients transferred with sICH and EVD placement. Patients admitted between January 2011-July 2013 (2011 Control) were compared with patients admitted either to the CCRU or the NCCU (2013 Control) between August 2013-September 2015. The primary outcome was time interval from arrival at any intensive care units (ICU) to time of EVD placement (ARR-EVD). Secondary outcomes included time interval from emergency department transfer request to arrival, and in-hospital mortality. We assessed clinical association by multivariable logistic regressions.

RESULTS

We analyzed 259 sICH patients who received EVDs: 123 (48%) CCRU; 81 (31%) 2011 Control; and 55 (21%) in the 2013 Control. The groups had similar characteristics, age, disease severity, and mortality. Median ARR-EVD time was 170 minutes [106-311] for CCRU patients; 241 minutes [152-490] (p < 0.01) for 2011 Control; and 210 minutes [139-574], p = 0.28) for 2013 Control. Median transfer request-arrival time for CCRU patients was significantly less than both control groups. Multivariable logistic regression showed each minute delay in ARR-EVD was associated with 0.03% increased likelihood of death (odds ratio 1.0003, 95% confidence interval, 1.0001-1.006, p = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

Patients admitted to the CCRU had shorter transfer times when compared to patients admitted directly to other ICUs. Compared to the specialty NCCU, the CCRU had similar time interval from arrival to EVD placement. A resuscitation unit like the CCRU can complement the specialty unit NCCU in caring for patients with sICH who require EVDs.

Factors associated with refractory pain in emergency patients admitted to emergency general surgery

BACKGROUND

Oligoanalgesia in emergency departments (EDs) is multifactorial. A previous study reported that emergency providers did not adequately manage patients with severe pain despite objective findings for surgical pathologies. Our study aims to investigate clinical and laboratory factors, in addition to providers' interventions, that might have been associated with oligoanalgesia in a group of ED patients with moderate and severe pains due to surgical pathologies.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of adult patients who were transferred directly from referring EDs to the emergency general surgery (EGS) service at a quaternary academic center between January 2014 and December 2016. Patients who were intubated, did not have adequate records, or had mild pain were excluded. The primary outcome was refractory pain, which was defined as pain reduction <2 units on the 0-10 pain scale between triage and ED departure.

RESULTS

We analyzed 200 patients, and 58 (29%) had refractory pain. Patients with refractory pain had significantly higher disease severity, serum lactate (3.4±2.0 mg/dL vs. 1.4±0.9 mg/dL, P=0.001), and less frequent pain medication administration (median [interquartile range], 3 [3-5] vs. 4 [3-7], P=0.001), when compared to patients with no refractory pain. Multivariable logistic regression showed that the number of pain medication administration (odds ratio [OR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.68-0.98) and ED serum lactate levels (OR 3.80, 95% CI 2.10-6.80) were significantly associated with the likelihood of refractory pain.

CONCLUSIONS

In ED patients transferring to EGS service, elevated serum lactate levels were associated with a higher likelihood of refractory pain. Future studies investigating pain management in patients with elevated serum lactate are needed.

Care Intensity During Transport to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit: Transport Clinician's Role

OBJECTIVE

Patients are often transferred between hospitals for a higher level of care. Critically ill patients require high-intensity care after transfer, but their care intensity during transport is unknown. We studied transport clinicians' management for patients who had time-sensitive or critical illnesses and were transferred to a critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) at a quaternary academic center.

METHODS

We prospectively surveyed transport clinicians who brought interhospital transport patients to the CCRU between March 1, 2019, and January 8, 2020. The primary outcome was care intensity during transport, which was defined as new interventions rendered by transport clinicians.

RESULTS

We analyzed 852 surveys. Seventy-four percent of transports occurred by ground, and 54% originated from emergency departments. Up to 19% of patients received 2 or more interventions, whereas 29% received at least 1 intervention during transport. Ventilator management occurred in 25% of cases. When adjusting for known confounders, respiratory failure or acute respiratory distress syndrome, air transport, and contacting the CCRU attending physicians en route were associated with a higher likelihood of an intervention during transport.

CONCLUSION

Transport clinicians provided new interventions in 48% of patients being transferred to the CCRU. Patients with respiratory failure or acute respiratory distress syndrome and those transported by helicopter emergency medical services were more likely to receive interventions en route.

Critical Care Delivery Solutions in the Emergency Department: Evolving Models in Caring for ICU Boarders

The National Academy of Medicine has identified emergency department (ED) crowding as a health care delivery problem. Because the ED is a portal of entry to the hospital, 25% of all ED encounters are related to critical illness. Crowding at both an ED and hospital level can thus lead to boarding of a number of critically ill patients in the ED. EDs are required to not only deliver immediate resuscitative and stabilizing care to critically ill patients on presentation but also provide longitudinal care while boarding for the ICU. Crowding and boarding are multifactorial and complex issues, for which different models for delivery of critical care in the ED have been described. Herein, we provide a narrative review of different models of delivery of critical care reported in the literature and highlight aspects for consideration for successful local implementation.