ArticlePloS one2024
Clinical outcomes of a joint ICU and palliative care multidisciplinary rounding model: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing palliative care practices in intensive care units and interpreting them using the lens of appropriate care concepts. An umbrella review.Intensive care medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis retrospective cohort study assessed whether implementation of a joint inpatient palliative care (IPC) and ICU multidisciplinary rounding model affected clinical outcomes including ICU length of stay (LOS).
methodsBeginning in October of 2018, an IPC physician joined the pre-existing ICU multidisciplinary rounds. Data were collected for ICU patients admitted during a 6-month period before this intervention and a 6-month period after the intervention. Data were extracted from an integrated electronic medical records (EMR) data system and compared by Wilcoxon and chi-square test for continuous and categorical variables respectively. Negative binomial regression was used to analyze the primary outcome measure, ICU LOS.
resultsPatients in the intervention group spent fewer days in the ICU (3.7 vs. 3.9 days, p = 0.05; RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.97, p = 0.02) and in the hospital (7.5 vs. 7.8 days, p<0.01) compared to the pre-intervention group. The rate of CPR was lower in the intervention group, but the difference was not statistically significant [13(3.1%) vs. 23(5.3%), p = 0.10]. The groups did not differ significantly in rate of hospital mortality, number of days connected to mechanical ventilation via endotracheal tube, or bounceback to the ED or hospital. Multivariable analysis of the primary outcome demonstrated that patients with prior palliative care involvement had longer ICU LOS (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.04-2.06, p = 0.03) when controlling for other variables.
conclusionThe presented joint IPC-ICU multidisciplinary rounding model was associated with a statistically significant reduction in ICU and hospital LOS, but the clinical significance of this reduction is unclear.
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.