ArticleMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2013
[Cross sectional study of structural quality of German intensive care units. A reevaluation of the DIVI register].
Article in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffectiveness of intensive care treatment is essential to cope with increasing costs. The German national register of intensive care established by the German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care Medicine (DIVI) contains basic data on the structure of intensive care units in Germany. A repeat analysis of data of the DIVI register within 8 years provides information for the development of intensive care units under different economic circumstances.
methodsThe recent data on the structure of intensive care units were obtained in 2008 and compared with the primary multicenter study from 2000. The hospitals selected were a representative sample for the whole of Germany. Data on the status of the hospital, staff and technical facilities, foundation of the hospital and the statistics of mechanically ventilated patients were analyzed.
resultsThe technical facilities and the number of staff have improved from 2000 to 2008. A smaller availability of diagnostic procedures and staff remain in hospitals for basic treatment outside normal working hours. The average utilization of intensive care unit beds was not altered. The existence of intermediate care units did not significantly change the proportion of patients with artificial ventilation or ventilation times. The number of beds in intensive care units was unchanged as was the average number of beds in units and the number of patients treated. A relevant number of beds of intensive care units shifted towards hospitals with private foundation without changes in the overall numbers. The structure of the hospitals was comparable at both time points.
conclusionsThe introduction of intermediate care units did not alter ventilation parameters of patients in 2008 compared with 2000. There is no obvious medical reason for the shift of intensive care beds towards private hospitals. The number of staff and patients varied considerably between the intensive care units. The average number of patients treated per bed was not different between the periods or between hospitals with different structures. Overall availability of medical staff and diagnostic procedures increased during the study period. An increase of availability of fully trained medical staff in intensive care medicine is desirable to increase the quality of treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23719669What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.