Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34688248›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2021

Emergency department admissions to the intensive care unit - a national retrospective study.

Susanne B Wilhelms, Daniel B Wilhelms

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. The utility of brain natriuretic peptide as a prognosticating marker in critical care patients.The Southern African journal of critical care : the official journal of the Critical Care Society · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Susanne B WilhelmsDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care in Linköping, and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. susanne.wilhelms@liu.se.
Daniel B WilhelmsDepartment of Emergency Medicine in Linköping, and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Linköping University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEmergency departments (EDs) see a rising number of patients, but only a small fraction of ED patients need immediate intensive care. The characteristics of these patients are mostly unknown and there is reason to believe that there are large inter-hospital differences in thresholds for intensive care admissions from the ED. The purpose of this study was to give a nationwide overview of ED admissions directly to intensive care units.

methodsWe used the Swedish Intensive care Registry to identify all patients admitted to intensive care from the ED (January 1, 2013 until June 7, 2018). The primary outcome was discharge diagnosis after intensive care (primary ICU diagnosis code). ICU mortality and" ICU admission due to only observation" were analyzed as secondary outcomes.

results110,072 ICU admissions were included, representing 94,546 unique patients. Intoxication, trauma and neurological conditions were the most common causes for intensive care, but large variations according to age, sex and hospital type were seen. Intoxication was the most prevalent diagnosis in young adults (46.8% of admissions in 18-29 years old), whereas infectious diseases predominated in the elderly (17.0% in 65-79 years old). Overall, ICU mortality was 7.2%, but varied substantially with age, sex, type of hospital and medical condition. Cardiac conditions had the highest mortality rates, reaching 32.9%. The mortality was higher in academic centers compared to rural hospitals (9.3% vs 5.0%). It was more common to be admitted to ICU for only observation in rural hospitals than in academic centers (20.1% vs 7.8%). Being admitted to ICU only for observation was most common in patients with intoxication (30.6%).

conclusionsOverall, intoxication was the most common cause for ICU admission from the ED. However, causes of ED ICU admissions differ substantially according to age, sex and hospital type. Being admitted to the ICU only for observation was most common in intoxicated patients.

trial registrationNot applicable (no interventions).

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsPatient AdmissionAdolescentAdultAgedEmergency Service, HospitalHospitalizationHospital MortalityHumansRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultCritical careEmergency medicineEpidemiologyInternational classifications of diseasesMortality

Identifiers

PMID34688248
PMCPMC8540137
OpenAlexW3210348319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.