ArticleAcute and critical care2025
Comparing single-patient and multi-patient room intensive care units: a multicenter cohort study on architectural differences and clinical significance in South Korea.
Article in Acute and critical care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Article
- Survival improvement through well-designed intensive care unit architecture.Acute and critical care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe design of intensive care units (ICUs) is increasingly acknowledged as a crucial factor affecting patient outcomes. Transitioning from multi-bed patient rooms (MPRs) to single-bed patient rooms (SPRs) aims to improve infection control, patient privacy, and quality of care. However, concerns remain regarding potential patient isolation and reduced staff situational awareness. This study aims to evaluate clinical outcomes in SPR-structured ICUs compared to mixed SPR and MPR ICUs.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted across three university-affiliated tertiary hospitals between April 2022 and August 2023. The study population included ICU patients aged ≥18 years, excluding those admitted to cardiac and neonatal ICUs. Outcomes assessed included ICU mortality and severity scores based on Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores.
resultsThis study included 3,179 ICU patients across three sites: Site A consisted exclusively of SPRs, while sites B and C had mixed SPR and MPR arrangements. ICU mortality rates were 8.3%, 15.2%, and 9.7% for sites A, B, and C, respectively (P<0.001). Propensity score matching and logistic regression analysis demonstrated that SPRs were associated with significantly reduced ICU mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.40-0.73).
conclusionsSPRs were associated with a protective effect, reducing ICU mortality. Clinical outcomes in ICUs appear to be influenced by structural design improvements alongside other clinical factors.
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.