ArticleMedical care2021
Advanced Practice Provider-inclusive Staffing Models and Patient Outcomes in Pediatric Critical Care.
Article in Medical care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Critical Care Advanced Practice Providers: Practice and Workforce.Critical care explorations · 2026Article
- Availability of Advanced Practice Providers in Adult Intensive Care Units in the United States: A Survey.American journal of critical care : an official publication, American Association of Critical-Care Nurses · 2025Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPediatric intensive care units (PICUs) are increasingly staffed with advanced practice providers (APPs), supplementing traditional physician staffing models.
objectivesWe evaluate the effect of APP-inclusive staffing models on clinical outcomes and resource utilization in US PICUs. RESEARCH
designRetrospective cohort study of children admitted to PICUs in 9 states in 2016 using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Databases. PICU staffing models were assessed using a contemporaneous staffing survey. We used multivariate regression to examine associations between staffing models with and without APPs and outcomes. MEASURES: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included odds of hospital acquired conditions and ICU and hospital lengths of stay.
resultsThe sample included 38,788 children in 40 PICUs. Patients admitted to PICUs with APP-inclusive staffing were younger (6.1±5.9 vs. 7.1±6.2 y) and more likely to have complex chronic conditions (64% vs. 43%) and organ failure on admission (25% vs. 22%), compared with patients in PICUs with physician-only staffing. There was no difference in mortality between PICU types [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-1.81, P=0.30]. Patients in PICUs with APP-inclusive staffing had lower odds of central line-associated blood stream infections (AOR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.59-0.98, P=0.03) and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (AOR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.61-0.86, P<0.001). There were no differences in lengths of stay.
conclusionsDespite being younger and sicker, children admitted to PICUs with APP-inclusive staffing had no increased odds of mortality and lower odds of some hospital acquired conditions compared with those in PICUs with physician-only staffing. Further research can inform APP integration strategies which optimize 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.