Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40042218›Full record

ArticleCritical care explorations2025

The Case for Telemedicine-Enhanced Nighttime Staffing in a Neuro-ICU.

Belinda L Udeh, Nicolas R Thompson, Ryan D Honomichl, Brittany R Lapin, Irene L Katzan, Lori Griffiths, Joao A Gomes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care explorations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Belinda L UdehNeurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Nicolas R ThompsonNeurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Ryan D HonomichlNeurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Brittany R LapinNeurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Irene L KatzanNeurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Lori GriffithsNeurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Joao A GomesNeurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceThis study compares the health outcomes and healthcare utilization of two staffing models for specialized neuro-ICU (NICU): a 24/7 intensive staffing (IS) model and a daytime 12-hour intensivist model with 12-hour nocturnal telemedicine-enhanced (TE) coverage. The IS model was studied from July 2016 to June 2017. The TE model was studied during the implementation period from July 2017 to June 2018.

objectivesTo compare the health outcomes and healthcare utilization of two staffing models for a specialized NICU.

designRetrospective cohort study. SETTING AND

participantsNICU with 24 beds in a 1200-bed urban, quaternary care, academic hospital in Northeast Ohio. Participants were critically ill patients with primary neurologic injuries admitted to the NICU between July 2016 and June 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Multivariable logistic, and negative binomial regression analysis compared the following outcomes: mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and ventilator days. Demographics and patient characteristics, including Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation scores, were used in model adjustments.

resultsThree thousand seventy-three patients were studied: n equals to 1542 IS (average age 61 yr [sd 17], 49% female, 73% White race) and n equals to 1531 TE (average age 62 yr (sd 17), 49% female, 70% White race). The TE model required less staff than IS model (5 vs. 9 staff intensivists), respectively. Compared with IS, the TE cohort had similar demographics and clinical indications, although the groups differed on the distribution of the body systems necessitating ICU admission. TE model was protective of ICU mortality compared with IS model (odds ratio = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.82; p = 0.002). However, TE was associated with a 10% increase in ICU LOS (incident rate ratio [IRR] = 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.18; p = 0.006) and a 13% increase in total LOS (IRR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.06-1.20; p < 0.001). There was no difference in ventilator days between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The availability of critical care staff is not keeping pace with demand, especially in specialized ICUs, including NICU. The TE model required fewer staff with similar clinical outcomes. This is a preliminary study highlighting that alternate specialized ICU staffing models could require fewer labor requirements while still maintaining quality of care. Further research is required to assess the true impact of LOS differences and examine the impact of these models on physician burnout and retention. This new understanding would provide additional guidance on ICU staffing options and telemedicine costs to hospitals, ensuring efficient and effective resource allocation as ICU demands continue to increase.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsPersonnel Staffing and SchedulingTelemedicineAgedCritical IllnessFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOhioRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID40042218
PMCPMC11884836

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.