ArticleBMJ open2025
Interhospital transports and mortality in patients with critical COVID-19: a single-centre cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare mortality rates and length of hospital stay between patients with critical COVID-19 transferred to another hospital due to capacity constraints and those who remained at their initial admission hospital.
designSingle-centre cohort study. SETTING AND
participants665 patients were treated for SARS-CoV-2 at two intensive care units (ICUs) in Stockholm, Sweden, from 1 March 2020 to 30 June 2021. Data on interhospital transfers (IHTs) were retrieved from medical records and patient data management systems according to predefined protocols.
main outcome measuresThe outcomes were 30-day and 90-day mortality, days alive and out of ICU. HR with 95% CI were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models with adjustments for age, sex, body mass index, severity of illness, comorbidity, invasive ventilation, treatment limitations and pandemic waves.
resultsOf 665 patients, 133 (20%) were transferred to another hospital. The mortality rate of transferred patients compared with non-transferred patients at 30 days was 19% vs 26% (p=0.13) and at 90 days 26% vs 30% (p=0.43). In the adjusted Cox regression analysis, IHT was associated with a lower mortality risk at 30 days (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.76) and 90 days (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.79). However, the number of days alive and out of ICU was significantly lower for the IHT group at 30 days.
conclusionIn our study, IHT due to capacity constraints among critically ill COVID-19 patients was not associated with a higher mortality risk. The suitability for transfer was likely associated with lower mortality, although residual confounding cannot be ruled out. The requirement for invasive ventilation among transferred patients might account for the extended length of ICU stay, rather than the transfer itself. However, the difficulty in studying this issue lies in the fact that while patients are likely exposed to risks during transfer, they are simultaneously the patients stable enough to be transported.
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.