Tele-ICU Increases Interhospital Transfers: Does Big Brother Know Better?

Telemedicine Coverage of Intensive Care Units: A Narrative Review

Telemedicine coverage of intensive care units is an organizational innovation that has been touted as a means to improve access to and quality of critical care. The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss the different organizational models of intensive care unit telemedicine and factors that have influenced its adoption and to review the existing literature to consider whether it has lived up to its promise. We conclude by suggesting future directions to fill in some of the existing gaps in the literature.

Telemedicine in the ICU: clinical outcomes, economic aspects, and trainee education

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The evidence base for telemedicine in the ICU (tele-ICU) is rapidly expanding. The last 2 years have seen important additions to our understanding of when, where, and how telemedicine in the ICU adds value.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent publications and a recent meta-analysis confirm that tele-ICU improves core clinical outcomes for ICU patients. Recent evidence further demonstrates that comprehensive tele-ICU programs have the potential to quickly recuperate their implementation and operational costs and significantly increase case volumes and direct contribution margins particularly if additional logistics and care standardization functions are embedded to optimize ICU bed utilization and reduce complications. Even though the adoption of tele-ICU is increasing and the vast majority of today's medical graduates will regularly use some form of telemedicine and/or tele-ICU, telemedicine modules have not consistently found their way into educational curricula yet. Tele-ICU can be used very effectively to standardize supervision of medical trainees in bedside procedures or point-of-care ultrasound exams, especially during off-hours. Lastly, tele-ICUs routinely generate rich operational data, as well as risk-adjusted acuity and outcome data across the spectrum of critically ill patients, which can be utilized to support important clinical research and quality improvement projects.

SUMMARY

The value of tele-ICU to improve patient outcomes, optimize ICU bed utilization, increase financial performance and enhance educational opportunities for the next generation of providers has become more evident and differentiated in the last 2 years.

Outcomes of Ventilated Patients With Sepsis Who Undergo Interhospital Transfer: A Nationwide Linked Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The outcomes of critically ill patients who undergo interhospital transfer are not well understood. Physicians assume that patients who undergo interhospital transfer will receive more advanced care that may translate into decreased morbidity or mortality relative to a similar patient who is not transferred. However, there is little empirical evidence to support this assumption. We examined country-level U.S. data from the Nationwide Readmissions Database to examine whether, in mechanically ventilated patients with sepsis, interhospital transfer is associated with a mortality benefit.

DESIGN

Retrospective data analysis using complex survey design regression methods with propensity score matching.

SETTING

The Nationwide Readmissions Database contains information about hospital admissions from 22 States, accounting for roughly half of U.S. hospitalizations; the database contains linkage numbers so that admissions and transfers for the same patient can be linked across 1 year of follow-up.

PATIENTS

From the 2013 Nationwide Readmission Database Sample, 14,325,172 hospital admissions were analyzed. There were 61,493 patients with sepsis and on mechanical ventilation. Of these, 1,630 patients (2.7%) were transferred during their hospitalization. A propensity-matched cohort of 1,630 patients who did not undergo interhospital transfer was identified.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The exposure of interest was interhospital transfer to an acute care facility. The primary outcome was hospital mortality; the secondary outcome was hospital length of stay. The propensity score included age, gender, insurance coverage, do not resuscitate status, use of renal replacement therapy, presence of shock, and Elixhauser comorbidities index. After propensity matching, interhospital transfer was not associated with a difference in in-hospital mortality (12.3% interhospital transfer vs 12.7% non-interhospital transfer; p = 0.74). However, interhospital transfer was associated with a longer total hospital length of stay (12.8 d interquartile range, 7.7-21.6 for interhospital transfer vs 9.1 d interquartile range, 5.1-17.0 for non-interhospital transfer; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with sepsis requiring mechanical ventilation who underwent interhospital transfer did not have improved outcomes compared with a cohort with matched characteristics who were not transferred. The study raises questions about the risk-benefit profile of interhospital transfer as an intervention.