Observational studyCritical care (London, England)2025
From indication to initiation of invasive intracranial pressure monitoring time differences between neurosurgeons and intensive care physicians: can intracranial hypertension dose be reduced? TIMING-ICP, a multicenter, observational, prospective study.
Observational study in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcranial Color Doppler for Assessing Cerebral Venous Outflow in Critically Ill and Surgical Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Letter to the authors of "Mind the drain: expanding TIMING-ICP discussion" and to the author of "Rethinking the clinical impact of timing in ICP monitoring initiation".Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Rethinking the clinical impact of timing in ICP monitoring initiation.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Mind the drain: expanding TIMING-ICP discussion.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe duration of episodes of intracranial hypertension is related to poor outcome, hence the need for prompt diagnosis. Numerous issues can lead to delays in the implementation of invasive intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring, thereby increasing the dose of intracranial hypertension to which the patient is exposed. The aim of this prospective, observational, multicenter study was to assess the magnitude of this delay, evaluating the time required for initiation of invasive ICP monitoring, from indication (T1) to initiation of the maneuver (T2) when performed by neurosurgeons compared to intensive care physicians.
methodsWe evaluated the impact of the operator performing the maneuver (neurosurgeon vs. intensivist) on the T2-T1 time interval, where T1 represents the time at which indication for invasive ICP monitoring is declared, and T2 the time at which the maneuver starts, defined as the skin incision. The effect of the operator performing the maneuver was evaluated through a parametric survival model. Both intraparenchymal catheters (IPCs) and external ventricular drains (EVDs) were considered as invasive ICP monitoring devices. Invasive monitoring could be performed in intensive care unit (ICU) or in operating room (OR).
resultsA total of 112 patients were included into the final analysis; 39 IPCs were placed by intensivists within the ICU, and a total of 73 IPCs and EVDs by neurosurgeons both within the ICU and OR settings. The mean difference in T2-T1 time for IPCs placement in the ICU was 69 min (CI 50.1-94.8) in the intensivist group and 145 min (CI 103.4-202.9) in neurosurgeon group. The mean difference between these groups, 76 min, was found to be statistically significant (p-value = 0.0021). In the group treated by neurosurgeons, no statistically significant differences were found in timing between the ICU and the OR.
conclusionsInvasive ICP monitoring performed with IPCs in ICU begins earlier when performed by intensivists rather than neurosurgeons. This finding suggests the possibility to obtain a prompt diagnosis of intracranial hypertension when intensivists intervein directly at patient's bedside. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and investigate their effect on outcome.
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.