ArticleBMC health services research2018
Internists' and intensivists' roles in intensive care admission decisions: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Formal guidelines from an expert panel: intensive care unit medical staffing, organisation and working hours to improve quality of life at work in France.Annals of intensive care · 2025Article
- Effects of closed- versus open-system intensive care units on mortality rates in patients with cancer requiring emergent surgical intervention for acute abdominal complications: a single-center retrospective study in Korea.Acute and critical care · 2024Article
- More than patient benefit: taking a broader view of ICU admission decisions.Intensive care medicine · 2023Article
- Hospital factors that influence ICU admission decision-making: a qualitative study of eight hospitals.Intensive care medicine · 2023Article
- Trained intensivist coverage and survival outcomes in critically ill patients: a nationwide cohort study in South Korea.Annals of intensive care · 2023Article
- Factors Influencing the Decision-making of Healthcare Providers Regarding the Transition of Patients from the Intensive Care Unit to the General Ward in Iran: A Qualitative Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Intensivist and COVID-19 in the United States of America: a narrative review of clinical roles, current workforce, and future direction.The Pan African medical journal · 2022Review
- Physicians' Views and Agreement about Patient- and Context-Related Factors Influencing ICU Admission Decisions: A Prospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntensive care Unit (ICU) admission decisions involve collaboration between internists and intensivists. Clear perception of each other's roles is a prerequisite for good collaboration. The objective was to explore how internists and intensivists perceive their roles during admission decisions.
methodsIndividual in-depth interviews with 12 intensivists and 12 internists working at a Swiss teaching hospital. Interviews were analyzed using a thematic approach.
resultsRoles could be divided into practical roles and identity roles. Internist and intensivists had the same perception of each other's practical roles. Internists' practical roles were: recognizing signs of severity when the patient becomes acutely ill, calling the intensivist at the right moment, having the relevant information about the patient and having determined the goals of care. Intensivists' practical roles were: assessing the patient on the ward, giving expert advice, making quick decisions, managing access to the ICU, having the final decision power and, sometimes, deciding whether or not to limit treatment. In complex situations, perceived flaws in performing practical roles could create tensions between the doctors. Intensivists' identity roles included those of leader, gatekeeper, life-death decision maker, and supporting colleague doctors (consultant, senior and helper). These roles could be perceived as emotionally burdensome. Internists' identity roles were those of leader and partner.
conclusionsDespite a common perception of each other's practical roles, tensions can arise between internists and intensivists in complex situations of ICU admission decisions. Training in communication skills and interprofessional education interventions aimed at a better understanding of each other roles would improve collaboration.
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.