Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36169958›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Cost-effectiveness of an Emergency Department-Based Intensive Care Unit.

Benjamin S Bassin, Nathan L Haas, Nana Sefa, Richard Medlin, Timothy A Peterson, Kyle Gunnerson, Steve Maxwell, James A Cranford, Stephanie Laurinec, Christine Olis and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Approach to Intensive Care Costing and Provision of Cost-effective Care.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Benjamin S BassinDivision of Critical Care, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Nathan L HaasDivision of Critical Care, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Nana SefaDivision of Critical Care, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Richard MedlinDepartment of Emergency Medicine and Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Timothy A PetersonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Kyle GunnersonDivision of Critical Care, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Steve MaxwellDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
James A CranfordDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Stephanie LaurinecDivision of Critical Care, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Christine OlisClinical Financial Planning & Analysis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Renee HaveyDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Robert LoofDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Patrick DunnClinical Financial Planning & Analysis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Debra BurrumDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Jennifer Gegenheimer-HolmesDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Robert W NeumarDivision of Critical Care, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USAnn Arbor Center for Independent Living · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Value in health care is quality per unit cost (V = Q/C), and an emergency department-based intensive care unit (ED-ICU) model has been associated with improved quality. To assess the value of this care delivery model, it is essential to determine the incremental direct cost of care. Objective: To determine the association of an ED-ICU with inflation-adjusted change in mean direct cost of care, net revenue, and direct margin per ED patient encounter. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective economic analysis evaluated the cost of care delivery to patients in the ED before and after deployment of the Joyce and Don Massey Family Foundation Emergency Critical Care Center, an ED-ICU, on February 16, 2015, at a large academic medical center in the US with approximately 75 000 adult ED visits per year. The pre-ED-ICU cohort was defined as all documented ED visits by patients 18 years or older with a complete financial record from September 8, 2012, through June 30, 2014 (660 days); the post-ED-ICU cohort, all visits from July 1, 2015, through April 21, 2017 (660 days). Fiscal year 2015 was excluded from analysis to phase in the new care model. Statistical analysis was performed March 1 through December 30, 2021. Exposures: Implementation of an ED-ICU. Main Outcomes and Measures: Inflation-adjusted direct cost of care, net revenue, and direct margin per patient encounter in the ED. Results: A total of 234 884 ED visits during the study period were analyzed, with 115 052 patients (54.7% women) in the pre-ED-ICU cohort and 119 832 patients (54.5% women) in the post-ED-ICU cohort. The post-ED-ICU cohort was older (mean [SD] age, 49.1 [19.9] vs 47.8 [19.6] years; P < .001), required more intensive respiratory support (2.2% vs 1.1%; P < .001) and more vasopressor use (0.5% vs 0.2%; P < .001), and had a higher overall case mix index (mean [SD], 1.7 [2.0] vs 1.5 [1.7]; P < .001). Implementation of the ED-ICU was associated with similar inflation-adjusted total direct cost per ED encounter (pre-ED-ICU, mean [SD], $4875 [$15 175]; post-ED-ICU, $4877 [$17 400]; P = .98). Inflation-adjusted net revenue per encounter increased by 7.0% (95% CI, 3.4%-10.6%; P < .001), and inflation-adjusted direct margin per encounter increased by 46.6% (95% CI, 32.1%-61.2%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Implementation of an ED-ICU was associated with no significant change in inflation-adjusted total direct cost per ED encounter. Holding delivery costs constant while improving quality demonstrates improved value via the ED-ICU model of care.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalIntensive Care UnitsAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisCritical CareFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36169958
PMCPMC9520346
OpenAlexW4297475901

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.