ArticleThe Neurohospitalist2017
A Novel Neuroscience Intermediate-Level Care Unit Model: Retrospective Analysis of Impact on Patient Flow and Safety.
Article in The Neurohospitalist, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Admitting Low-Risk Patients With Intracerebral Hemorrhage to a Neurological Step-Down Unit Is Safe, Results in Shorter Length of Stay, and Reduces Intensive Care Utilization: A Retrospective Controlled Cohort Study.The Neurohospitalist · 2020Article
- Neurocritical Care: A Growing International Collaborative.Neurocritical care · 2020Article
- Access to the Intensive Care Unit by Severe Head Injury Patients.Journal of neurosciences in rural practice · 2019Article
- Challenging the myth of outpatient craniotomy for brain tumor in a Sub-Saharan African setting: A case series of two patients in Ibadan, Nigeria.Surgical neurology international · 2019Article
- Impact of Telemedicine on Mortality, Length of Stay, and Cost Among Patients in Progressive Care Units: Experience From a Large Healthcare System.Critical care medicine · 2018Observational
- Safety and Costs of Stroke Unit Admission for Select Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage Patients.The Neurohospitalist · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeNeurointensive care units have been shown to improve patient outcomes across a variety of neurological and neurosurgical conditions. However, the efficacy of less resource-intensive intermediate-level care units to deliver similar care has not been well studied. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of neurocritical specialist comanagement on patient flow and safety in a neuroscience intermediate-level care unit.
methodsOur intervention consisted of the addition of a physician with critical care experience as well as training in neurology, anesthesiology, or intensive care to a neuroscience intermediate-level care unit to comanage patients alongside neurology and neurosurgery staff during weekday daytime hours. A retrospective analysis was performed on prospectively collected data pertaining to all patients admitted to the unit over a 3-year period, 1 year before our intervention and 2 years after. Patient statistics including wait times to admission, length of stay (LOS), and mortality were reviewed.
resultsFollowing the intervention, there were significant reductions in wait times to unit admission from both the emergency department and postanesthetic care unit, as well as reductions in the average LOS. No significant safety concerns were identified.
conclusionThis study has demonstrated that the optimization of a neuroscience intermediate-level care unit involving comanagement of patients by a neurocritical specialist can reduce wait times to admission and lengths of stay, with preserved safety outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.