Cargando…

The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis

BACKGROUND: In the year 2000, the organizational structure of the ICU in the Zaandam Medical Centre (ZMC) changed from an open to a closed format ICU. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of this organizational change on outcome in high risk surgical patients. METHODS: The medical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van der Sluis, Frederik J, Slagt, Cornelis, Liebman, Barbara, Beute, Jan, Mulder, Jan WR, Engel, Alexander F
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3176467/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21861878
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-11-18
_version_ 1782212227532587008
author van der Sluis, Frederik J
Slagt, Cornelis
Liebman, Barbara
Beute, Jan
Mulder, Jan WR
Engel, Alexander F
author_facet van der Sluis, Frederik J
Slagt, Cornelis
Liebman, Barbara
Beute, Jan
Mulder, Jan WR
Engel, Alexander F
author_sort van der Sluis, Frederik J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In the year 2000, the organizational structure of the ICU in the Zaandam Medical Centre (ZMC) changed from an open to a closed format ICU. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of this organizational change on outcome in high risk surgical patients. METHODS: The medical records of all consecutive high risk surgical patients admitted to the ICU from 1996 to 1998 (open format) and from 2003 to 2005 (closed format), were reviewed. High-risk patients were defined according to the Identification of Risk in Surgical patients (IRIS) score. Parameters studied were: mortality, morbidity, ICU length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS. RESULTS: Mortality of ICU patients was 25.7% in the open format group and 15.8% in the closed format group (p = 0.01). Morbidity decreased from 48.6% to 46.1% (p = 0.6). The average length of hospital stay was 17 days in the open format group, and 21 days in the closed format group (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: High risk surgical patients in the ICU are patients that have undergone complex and often extensive surgery. These patients are in need of specialized treatment and careful monitoring for maximum safety and optimal care. Our results suggest that closed format is a more favourable setting than open format to minimize the effects of high risk surgery, and to warrant safe outcome in this patient group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3176467
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31764672011-09-21 The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis van der Sluis, Frederik J Slagt, Cornelis Liebman, Barbara Beute, Jan Mulder, Jan WR Engel, Alexander F BMC Surg Research Article BACKGROUND: In the year 2000, the organizational structure of the ICU in the Zaandam Medical Centre (ZMC) changed from an open to a closed format ICU. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of this organizational change on outcome in high risk surgical patients. METHODS: The medical records of all consecutive high risk surgical patients admitted to the ICU from 1996 to 1998 (open format) and from 2003 to 2005 (closed format), were reviewed. High-risk patients were defined according to the Identification of Risk in Surgical patients (IRIS) score. Parameters studied were: mortality, morbidity, ICU length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS. RESULTS: Mortality of ICU patients was 25.7% in the open format group and 15.8% in the closed format group (p = 0.01). Morbidity decreased from 48.6% to 46.1% (p = 0.6). The average length of hospital stay was 17 days in the open format group, and 21 days in the closed format group (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: High risk surgical patients in the ICU are patients that have undergone complex and often extensive surgery. These patients are in need of specialized treatment and careful monitoring for maximum safety and optimal care. Our results suggest that closed format is a more favourable setting than open format to minimize the effects of high risk surgery, and to warrant safe outcome in this patient group. BioMed Central 2011-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC3176467/ /pubmed/21861878 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-11-18 Text en Copyright ©2011 van der Sluis et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
van der Sluis, Frederik J
Slagt, Cornelis
Liebman, Barbara
Beute, Jan
Mulder, Jan WR
Engel, Alexander F
The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis
title The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis
title_full The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis
title_fullStr The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis
title_full_unstemmed The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis
title_short The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis
title_sort impact of open versus closed format icu admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3176467/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21861878
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-11-18
work_keys_str_mv AT vandersluisfrederikj theimpactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT slagtcornelis theimpactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT liebmanbarbara theimpactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT beutejan theimpactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT mulderjanwr theimpactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT engelalexanderf theimpactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT vandersluisfrederikj impactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT slagtcornelis impactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT liebmanbarbara impactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT beutejan impactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT mulderjanwr impactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis
AT engelalexanderf impactofopenversusclosedformaticuadmissionpracticesontheoutcomeofhighrisksurgicalpatientsacohortanalysis