Predictors of 24-h mortality after inter-hospital transfer to a tertiary medical intensive care unit

Understanding characteristics and trajectories of patients experiencing early death after interhospital transfer

Twenty- to fifty-thousand patients die annually within 72 h of interhospital transfer (early death after transfer; EDAT). The characteristics and trajectories of these patients are ill-defined. In this retrospective cohort study, we characterized EDAT at three representative major referral centers. Primary outcomes included the presence and timing of goals of care (GOC) and/or prognostic discussions. Among 190 medical patients experiencing EDAT, 95 (50.0%) were >65 years, 115 (60.5%) male, and 137 (72.6%) White; 140 (73.7%) patients traveled >50 miles from home, and 174 (91.6%) were referred for specialty care. Whereas GOC were documented pretransfer for 40 patients (21.1%) and unknown for 97 patients (51%); 152 (80.0%) had posttransfer discussions, often within 24 h of death (125; 82.2%). Transfer >50 miles was associated with death ≤24 h after transfer and with posttransfer changes in code status. Further research is needed to evaluate disparities and describe the potential burdens of transfer at end-of-life. Infrequent pretransfer discussions of GOC suggest potential targets for improvement.

Interfacility transfer of the critically ill: Transfer status does not influence survival

PURPOSE

To estimate differences in case-mix adjusted hospital mortality between adult ICU patients who are transferred during their ICU-stay and those who are not.

METHODS

19,260 visits to 12 ICUs in Nova Scotia (NS), Canada April 2018-September 2023 were analyzed. Data were obtained from the NS Provincial ICU database. Generalized additive models (GAMs) were used to estimate differences in case-mix adjusted hospital mortality between patients who underwent transfer and those who did not.

RESULTS

1040/19,260 (5%) ICU visits involved interfacility-transfer. No difference in hospital mortality was identified between transferred and non-transferred patients by GAM (OR, 0.99, 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.19; p = 0.91). No mortality difference was observed between patients undergoing a single transfer versus multiple (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.45 to -1.69; p = 0.68). A GAM including the categories no transfer, one transfer, and multiple transfers identified a difference in hospital mortality for patients that underwent multiple transfers compared to non-transferred patients (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.00, p = 0.05), but no difference was identified in a post-hoc matched cohort sensitivity analysis (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.01, p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The transfer of critically ill patients between ICUs in Nova Scotia did not impact case-mix adjusted hospital mortality.

Interhospital Transfer of Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure in the United States: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

Interhospital transfer of patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) is relevant in the current landscape of critical care delivery. However, current transfer practices for patients with ARF are highly variable, poorly formalized, and lack evidence. We aim to synthesize the existing evidence, identify knowledge gaps, and highlight persisting questions related to interhospital transfer of patients with ARF.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, CINAHL Plus, and American Psychological Association.

STUDY SELECTION

We included studies that evaluated or described hospital transfers of adult (age > 18) patients with ARF between January 2020 and 2024 conducted in the United States. Using predetermined search terms and strategies, a total of 3369 articles were found across all databases. After deduplication, 1748 abstracts were screened by authors with 45 articles that advanced to full-text review. This yielded 16 studies that fit our inclusion criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

The studies were reviewed in accordance to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews by three authors.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Included studies were mostly retrospective analyses of heterogeneous patients with various etiologies and severity of ARF. Overall, transferred patients were younger, had high severity of illness, and were more likely to have commercial insurance compared with nontransferred cohorts. There is a paucity of data examining why patients get transferred. Studies that retrospectively evaluated outcomes between transferred and nontransferred cohorts found no differences in mortality, although transferred patients have a longer length of stay. There is limited evidence to suggest that patients transferred early in their course have improved outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our scoping review highlights the sparse evidence and the urgent need for further research into understanding the complexity behind ARF transfers. Future studies should focus on defining best practices to inform clinical decision-making and improve downstream outcomes.

Unit-to-unit transfer due to shortage of intensive care beds in Sweden 2015-2019 was associated with a lower risk of death but a longer intensive care stay compared to no transfer: a registry study

BACKGROUND

Intensive care unit-to-unit transfer due to temporary shortage of beds is increasing in Sweden. Transportation induces practical hazards, and the change of health care provider may prolong the length of stay in intensive care. We previously showed that the risk of death at 90 days did not differ between patients transferred due to a shortage of beds and non-transferred patients with a similar burden of illness in a tertiary intensive care unit. The aim of this study was to widen the analysis to a nation-wide cohort of critically ill patients transferred to another intensive care unit in Sweden due to shortage of intensive care beds.

METHODS

Retrospective comparison between capacity transferred and non-transferred patients, based on data from the Swedish Intensive Care Registry during a 5-year period before the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with insufficient data entries or a recurring capacity transfer within 90 days were excluded. To assess the association between capacity transfer and death as well as intensive care stay within 90 days after ICU admission, logistic regression models with step-wise adjustment for SAPS3 score, primary ICD-10 ICU diagnosis and the number of days in the intensive care unit before transfer were applied.

RESULTS

From 161,140 eligible intensive care admissions, 2912 capacity transfers were compared to 135,641 discharges or deaths in the intensive care unit. Ninety days after ICU admission, 28% of transferred and 21% of non-transferred patients were deceased. In the fully adjusted model, capacity transfer was associated with a lower risk of death within 90 days than no transfer; OR (95% CI) 0.71 (0.65-0.69) and the number of days spent in intensive care was longer: 12.4 [95% CI 12.2-12.5] vs 3.3 [3.3-3.3].

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive care unit-to-unit transfer due to shortage of bed capacity as compared to no transfer during a 5-year period preceding the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden was associated with lower risk of death within 90 days but with longer stay in intensive care.

Characteristics of critically ill patients with cancer associated with intensivist's perception of inappropriateness of ICU admission: A retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Although admitting cancer patients to the ICU is no longer an issue, it may be valuable to identify patients perceived least likely to benefit from admission. Our objective was to investigate factors associated with potentially inappropriate ICU admission.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer with unplanned ICU admission. We classified admissions as appropriate or potentially inappropriate according to Society of Critical Care Medicine guidelines. We used logistic regression model to assess factors associated with inappropriateness for ICU admission.

RESULTS

From 3384 patients, 663 (19.6%) were classified as potentially inappropriate. They received more invasive mechanical ventilation (25.3% vs 12.5%, P < 0.001) and vasopressors (34.4% vs 30.1%, P = 0.034), had higher ICU [3 (2,6) vs 2 (1,4), P < 0.001] length-of-stay, higher ICU (32.7% vs 8.4%, P < 0.001), hospital (71.9% vs 21.3%, P < 0.001), and one-year mortality (97.6% vs 54.7%, P < 0.001) compared with those considered appropriate. Performance status impairment, more severe organ dysfunctions at admission, metastatic disease, and source of ICU admission were the characteristics associated with intensivist's perception of inappropriateness of ICU admission.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings may help guide ICU admission policies and triage criteria for end-of-life discussions among hospitalized patients with cancer.

Responding to COVID-19 Through Interhospital Resource Coordination: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic stressed hospital operations, requiring rapid innovations to address rise in demand and specialized COVID-19 services while maintaining access to hospital-based care and facilitating expertise. We aimed to describe a novel hospital system approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic, including multihospital coordination capability and transfer of COVID-19 patients to a single, dedicated hospital.

METHODS

We included patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction admitted to a 12-hospital network including a dedicated COVID-19 hospital. Our primary outcome was adherence to local guidelines, including admission risk stratification, anticoagulation, and dexamethasone treatment assessed by differences-in-differences analysis after guideline dissemination. We evaluated outcomes and health care worker satisfaction. Finally, we assessed barriers to safe transfer including transfer across different electronic health record systems.

RESULTS

During the study, the system admitted a total of 1209 patients. Of these, 56.3% underwent transfer, supported by a physician-led System Operations Center. Patients who were transferred were older (P = 0.001) and had similar risk-adjusted mortality rates. Guideline adherence after dissemination was higher among patients who underwent transfer: admission risk stratification (P < 0.001), anticoagulation (P < 0.001), and dexamethasone administration (P = 0.003). Transfer across electronic health record systems was a perceived barrier to safety and reduced quality. Providers positively viewed our transfer approach.

CONCLUSIONS

With standardized communication, interhospital transfers can be a safe and effective method of cohorting COVID-19 patients, are well received by health care providers, and have the potential to improve care quality.

Impact of Palliative Care on Interhospital Transfers to the Intensive Care Unit

Community hospitals will often transfer their most complex, critically ill patients to intensive care units (ICUs) of tertiary care centers for specialized, comprehensive care. This population of patients has high rates of morbidity and mortality. Palliative care involvement in critically ill patients has been demonstrated to reduce over-utilization of resources and hospital length of stays. We hypothesized that transfers from community hospitals had low rates of palliative care involvement and high utilization of ICU resources. In this single-center retrospective cohort study, 848 patients transferred from local community hospitals to the medical ICU (MICU) and cardiac care unit (CCU) at a tertiary care center between 2016-2018 were analyzed for patient disposition, length of stay, hospitalization cost, and time to palliative care consultation. Of the 848 patients, 484 (57.1%) expired, with 117 (13.8%) having expired within 48 hours of transfer. Palliative care consult was placed for 201 (23.7%) patients. Patients with palliative care consult were statistically more likely to be referred to hospice (p<0.001). Over two-thirds of palliative care consults were placed later than 5 days after transfer. Time to palliative care consult was positively correlated with length of hospitalization among MICU patients (r=0.79) and CCU patients (r=0.90). Time to palliative consult was also positively correlated with hospitalization cost among MICU patients (r=0.75) and CCU patients (r=0.86). These results indicate early palliative care consultation in this population may result in timely goals of care discussions and optimization of resources.

Intensive care unit to unit capacity transfers are associated with increased mortality: an observational cohort study on patient transfers in the Swedish Intensive Care Register

Background

Transfers from one intensive care unit (ICU) to another ICU are associated with increased length of intensive care and hospital stay. Inter-hospital ICU transfers are carried out for three main reasons: clinical transfers, capacity transfers and repatriations. The aim of the study was to show that different ICU transfers differ in risk-adjusted mortality rate with repatriations having the least risk.

Results

Observational cohort study of adult patients transferred between Swedish ICUs during 3 years (2016–2018) with follow-up ending September 2019. Primary and secondary end-points were survival to 30 days and 180 days after discharge from the first ICU. Data from 75 ICUs in the Swedish Intensive Care Register, a nationwide intensive care register, were used for analysis (89% of all Swedish ICUs), covering local community hospitals, district general hospitals and tertiary care hospitals. We included adult patients (16 years or older) admitted to ICU and subsequently discharged by transfer to another ICU. Only the first admission was used. Exposure was discharge to any other ICU (ICU-to-ICU transfer), whether in the same or in another hospital. Transfers were grouped into three predefined categories: clinical transfer, capacity transfer, and repatriation. We identified 15,588 transfers among 112,860 admissions (14.8%) and analysed 11,176 after excluding 4112 repeat transfer of the same individual and 300 with missing risk adjustment. The majority were clinical transfers (62.7%), followed by repatriations (21.5%) and capacity transfers (15.8%). Unadjusted 30-day mortality was 25.0% among capacity transfers compared to 14.5% and 16.2% for clinical transfers and repatriations, respectively. Adjusted odds ratio (OR) for 30-day mortality were 1.25 (95% CI 1.06–1.49 p = 0.01) for capacity transfers and 1.17 (95% CI 1.02–1.36 p = 0.03) for clinical transfers using repatriation as reference. The differences remained 180 days post-discharge.

Conclusions

There was a large proportion of ICU-to-ICU transfers and an increased odds of dying for those transferred due to other reasons than repatriation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13613-022-01003-x.

The mortality of critically ill patients was not associated with inter-hospital transfer due to a shortage of ICU beds - a single-centre retrospective analysis

Background

Patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are increasingly being transferred between ICUs due to a shortage of ICU beds, although this practice is potentially harmful. However, in tertiary units, the transfer of patients who are not in need of highly specialized care is often necessary. The aim of this study was to assess the association between a 90-day mortality and inter-hospital transfer due to a shortage of ICU beds in a tertiary centre.

Methods

Data were retrieved from the local ICU database from December 2011 to September 2019. The primary analysis was a risk-adjusted logistic regression model. Secondary analyses comprised case/control (transfer/non-transfer) matching.

Results

A total of 573 patients were transferred due to a shortage of ICU beds, and 8106 patients were not transferred. Crude 90-day mortality was higher in patients transferred due to a shortage of beds (189 patients (33%) vs 2188 patients (27%), p = 0.002). In the primary, risk-adjusted analysis, the risk of death at 90 days was similar between the groups (odds ratio 0.923, 95% confidence interval 0.75–1.14, p = 0.461). In the secondary analyses, a 90-day mortality was similar in transferred and non-transferred patients matched according to SAPS 3-score, age, days in the ICU and ICU diagnosis (p = 0.407); SOFA score on the day of discharge, ICU diagnosis and age (p = 0.634); or in a propensity score model (p = 0.229).

Conclusion

Mortality at 90 days in critically ill patients treated in a tertiary centre was not affected by transfer to another intensive care units due to a shortage of beds. We found this conclusion to be valid under the assumption that patients are carefully selected and that the transports are safely performed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40560-020-00501-z.

The first 2 months of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Yemen: Analysis of the surveillance data

INTRODUCTION

Yemen was one of the last countries in the world to declare the first case of the pandemic, on 10 April 2020. Fear and concerns of catastrophic outcomes of the epidemic in Yemen were immediately raised, as the country is facing a complex humanitarian crisis. The purpose of this report is to describe the epidemiological situation in Yemen during the first 2 months of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic.

METHODS

We analyzed the epidemiological data from 18 February to 05 June 2020, including the 2 months before the confirmation of the first case. We included in our analysis the data from 10 out of 23 governorates of Yemen, located in southern and eastern part of the country.

RESULTS

A total of 469 laboratory confirmed, 552 probable and 55 suspected cases with onset of symptoms between 18 February and 5 June 2020 were reported through the surveillance system. The median age among confirmed cases was 46 years (range: 1-90 years), and 75% of the confirmed cases were male. A total of 111 deaths were reported among those with confirmed infection. The mean age among those who died was 53 years (range: 14-88 years), with 63% of deaths (n = 70) occurring in individuals under the age 60 years. A total of 268 individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were hospitalized (57%), among whom there were 95 in-hospital deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

The surveillance strategy implemented in the first 2 months of the SARS CoV 2 in the southern and eastern governorates of Yemen, captured mainly severe cases. The mild and moderate cases were not self-reported to the health facilities and surveillance system due to limited resources, stigma, and other barriers. The mortality appeared to be higher in individuals aged under 60 years, and most fatalities occurred in individuals who were in critical condition when they reached the health facilities. It is unclear whether the presence of other acute comorbidities contributed to the high death rate among SARS-CoV-2 cases. The findings only include the southern and eastern part of the country, which is home to 31% of the total population of Yemen, as the data from the northern part of the country was inaccessible for analysis. This makes our results not generalizable to the rest of the country.

Prognostic factors for short-term patient mortality following interhospital transfers

Introduction:

The data on short-term mortality among patients following interhospital transfers remain uncertain in the literature, and particularly in Turkey. The aim of this study was to determine the characteristics of interhospital transfer patients and to investigate the factors associated with 72-h mortality.

Methods:

All interhospital transfer patients aged 16 years and above from a secondary care public hospital were evaluated retrospectively for the period January to December 2018. A total of 34 variables, including age, gender, date of transfer, referring unit, diagnosis, reason for transfer, transfer destination, waiting and transfer time, vitals, the Glasgow Coma Scale, the presence of intubation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation before transfer, and the use of vasopressor medication, were included in the univariate analysis. The factors associated with short-term mortality were identified by multivariate regression analysis.

Results:

During the 1-year study period, 1216 interhospital transfers were performed. A total of 116 (9.5%) patients died within 72 h following interhospital transfer. Among all the transfers, the median age was 62 (interquartile range, 39–76) years. According to the multivariate analysis, vasopressor use (odds ratio, 3.55; 95% confidence interval: 1.32–9.52), age (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 1.00–1.03), pulse (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 1.00–1.02), and diastolic blood pressure (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval: 0.95–0.99) were predictive of 72-h mortality following interhospital transfer.

Conclusion:

Nearly 10% of all the transfers from the secondary care public hospital resulted in mortality within 72 h. Vasopressor use, advanced age, lower diastolic blood pressure, and tachycardia were the most important factors associated with short-term mortality.

Risky Behavior: Hospital Transfers Associated with Early Mortality and Rates of Goals of Care Discussions

Introduction

Inter-hospital transfer (IHT) patients have higher in-hospital mortality, higher healthcare costs, and worse outcomes compared to non-transferred patients. Goals of care (GoC) discussions prior to transfer are necessary in patients at high risk for decline to ensure that the intended outcome of transfer is goal concordant. However, the frequency of these discussions is not well understood. This study was intended to assess the prevalence of GoC discussions in IHT patients with early mortality, defined as death within 72 hours of transfer, and prevalence of primary diagnoses associated with in-hospital mortality.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of IHT patients aged 18 and older who died within 72 hours of transfer to Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center between October 1, 2016-October 2018. Documentation of GoC discussions within the electronic health record (EHR) prior to transfer was the primary outcome. We also assessed charts for primary diagnosis associated with in-hospital mortality, code status changes prior to death, in-hospital healthcare interventions, and frequency of palliative care consults.

Results

We included in this study a total of 298 patients, of whom only 10.1% had documented GoC discussion prior to transfer. Sepsis (29.9%), respiratory failure (28.2%), and cardiac arrest (27.5%) were the top three diagnoses associated with in-hospital mortality, and 73.2% of the patients transitioned to comfort measures prior to death. After transfer, 18.1% of patients had invasive procedures performed with 9.7% undergoing major surgery. Palliative care consultation occurred in only 4.4%.

Conclusion

The majority (89.9%) of IHT patients with early mortality did not have GoC discussion documented within EHR prior to transfer, although most transitioned to comfort measures prior to their deaths, highlighting that additional work is needed in this area.