Show simple item record

An empirical derivation of the optimal time interval for defining ICU readmissions

dc.contributor.authorBrown, SES
dc.contributor.authorRatcliffe, SJ
dc.contributor.authorHalpern, SD
dc.coverage.spatialPhiladelphia, PA
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-27T21:34:26Z
dc.date.available2022-12-27T21:34:26Z
dc.date.issued2013-08-01
dc.identifier.issn0025-7079
dc.identifier.issn1537-1948
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23698182
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/175339en
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND:: Intensive care unit (ICU) readmission rates are commonly viewed as indicators of ICU quality. However, definitions of ICU readmissions vary, and it is unknown which, if any, readmissions are associated with ICU quality. OBJECTIVE:: Empirically derive the optimal interval between ICU discharge and readmission for purposes of considering ICU readmission as an ICU quality indicator. RESEARCH DESIGN:: Retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS:: A total of 214,692 patients discharged from 157 US ICUs participating in the Project IMPACT database, 2001-2008. MEASURES:: We graphically examined how patient characteristics and ICU discharge circumstances (eg, ICU census) were related to the odds of ICU readmissions as the allowable interval between ICU discharge and readmission was lengthened. We defined the optimal interval by identifying inflection points where these relationships changed significantly and permanently. RESULTS:: A total of 2242 patients (1.0%) were readmitted to the ICU within 24 hours; 9062 (4.2%) within 7 days. Patient characteristics exhibited stronger associations with readmissions after intervals >48-60 hours. By contrast, ICU discharge circumstances and ICU interventions (eg, mechanical ventilation) exhibited weaker relationships as intervals lengthened, with inflection points at 30-48 hours. Because of the predominance of afternoon readmissions regardless of time of discharge, using intervals defined by full calendar days rather than fixed numbers of hours produced more valid results. DISCUSSION:: It remains uncertain whether ICU readmission is a valid quality indicator. However, having established 2 full calendar days (not 48 h) after ICU discharge as the optimal interval for measuring ICU readmissions, this study will facilitate future research designed to determine its validity. Copyright © 2013 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
dc.format.mediumPrint
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAge Factors
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectAged, 80 and over
dc.subjectComorbidity
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHealth Status
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectIntensive Care Units
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectOutcome Assessment, Health Care
dc.subjectPatient Readmission
dc.subjectQuality Indicators, Health Care
dc.subjectQuality of Health Care
dc.subjectRetrospective Studies
dc.subjectSex Factors
dc.subjectTime Factors
dc.subjectUnited States
dc.titleAn empirical derivation of the optimal time interval for defining ICU readmissions
dc.typeConference Paper
dc.identifier.pmid23698182
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/175339/2/ICU readm time.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/MLR.0b013e318293c2fa
dc.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.7302/6720
dc.identifier.sourceMedical Care
dc.description.versionPublished version
dc.date.updated2022-12-27T21:34:23Z
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0003-0374-0824
dc.description.filedescriptionDescription of ICU readm time.pdf : Published version
dc.identifier.volume51
dc.identifier.issue8
dc.identifier.startpage706
dc.identifier.endpage714
dc.identifier.name-orcidBrown, SES; 0000-0003-0374-0824
dc.identifier.name-orcidRatcliffe, SJ
dc.identifier.name-orcidHalpern, SD
dc.working.doi10.7302/6720en
dc.owningcollnameInternal Medicine, Department of


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.