Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27166622›Full record

Trial reportIntensive care medicine2016

Nurses versus physician-led interhospital critical care transport: a randomized non-inferiority trial.

Erik Jan van Lieshout, Jan Binnekade, Elmer Reussien, Dave Dongelmans, Nicole P Juffermans, Rob J de Haan, Marcus J Schultz, Margreeth B Vroom

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Erik Jan van LieshoutAcademic Medical Centre, Department of Intensive Care and Mobile Intensive Care Unit, University of Amsterdam, G3-206, 22700, 1100 DE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. e.j.vanlieshout@amc.nl.
Jan BinnekadeAcademic Medical Centre, Department of Intensive Care and Mobile Intensive Care Unit, University of Amsterdam, G3-206, 22700, 1100 DE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Elmer ReussienAcademic Medical Centre, Department of Intensive Care and Mobile Intensive Care Unit, University of Amsterdam, G3-206, 22700, 1100 DE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Dave DongelmansAcademic Medical Centre, Department of Intensive Care and Mobile Intensive Care Unit, University of Amsterdam, G3-206, 22700, 1100 DE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nicole P JuffermansAcademic Medical Centre, Department of Intensive Care and Mobile Intensive Care Unit, University of Amsterdam, G3-206, 22700, 1100 DE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Rob J de HaanAcademic Medical Centre, Clinical Research Unit, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcus J SchultzAcademic Medical Centre, Department of Intensive Care and Mobile Intensive Care Unit, University of Amsterdam, G3-206, 22700, 1100 DE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Margreeth B VroomAcademic Medical Centre, Department of Intensive Care and Mobile Intensive Care Unit, University of Amsterdam, G3-206, 22700, 1100 DE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
University of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRegionalization and concentration of critical care increases the need for interhospital transport. However, optimal staffing of ground critical care transport has not been evaluated.

methodsIn this prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint non-inferiority trial, critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation transported by interhospital ground critical care transport were randomized between transport staffed by a dedicated team comprising a critical care nurse and paramedic (nurses group) or a dedicated team including a critical care physician (nurses + physician group). The primary outcome was the number of patients with critical events, both clinical and technical, during transport. Clinical events included decrease in blood pressure, oxygen saturation, or temperature, blood loss, new cardiac arrhythmias, or death. Non-inferiority was assumed if the upper limit of the two-sided 90 % confidence interval (CI) for the between-group difference lies below the non-inferiority margin of 3 %.

resultsOf 618 eligible transported critically ill patients, 298 could be analyzed after randomization and allocation to the nurses group (n = 147) or nurses + physician group (n = 151). The percentages of patients with critical events were 16.3 % (24 incidents in 147 transports) in the nurses group and 15.2 % (23 incidents in 151 transports) in the nurses + physician group (difference 1.1 %, two-sided 90 % CI [-5.9 to 8.1]). Critical events occurred in both groups at a higher than the expected (0-1 %) rate. In the nurses group consultations for physician assistance were requested in 8.2 % (12 in 147 transports), all of which were performed prior to transport.

conclusionsThe number of patients with critical events did not markedly differ between critical care transports staffed by a critical care nurse and paramedic compared to a team including a critical care physician. However, as a result of an unexpected higher rate of critical events in both groups recorded by an electronic health record, non-inferiority of nurse-led interhospital critical transport could not be established ( http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN39701540 ).

Indexed as

NursesPhysiciansTransportation of PatientsAgedCritical CareElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Care TeamProspective StudiesWorkforceCritical care transportInterhospitalMobile intensive care unitPatient transfer

Identifiers

PMID27166622
PMCPMC4879164
OpenAlexW2362095032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.