4.5 Article

The effect of comorbidities on risk of intensive care readmission during the same hospitalization: A linked data cohort study

期刊

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 101-107

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2007.11.015

关键词

Confounding; ICU clinical indicator; Preexisting disease; Quality of care

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The aim of this study is to assess the effect of comorbidities on risk of readmission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and the excess hospital mortality associated with ICU readmissions. Materials and Methods: A cohort study used clinical data from a 22-bed multidisciplinary ICU in a university hospital and comorbidity data from the Western Australian hospital morbidity database. Results: From 16 926 consecutive ICU admissions between 1987 and 2002, and 654 (3.9%) of these patients were readmitted to ICU readmissions within the same hospitalization. Patients with readmission were older, more likely to be originally admitted from the operating theatre or hospital ward, had a higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE)-predicted mortality, and had more comorbidities when compared with patients without readmission. The number of Charlson comorbidities was significantly associated with late readmission (>72 hours) but not earl), readmission (<= 72 hours) in the multivariate analysis. Both early and late ICU readmissions were associated with an increased risk of hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.39; P = .004; odds ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.99; P = .022, respectively) after adjusting for age, admission source, type of admission, the APACHE-predicted mortality, and the number of Charlson comorbidities and APACHE chronic health conditions. Conclusions: Comorbidity was a risk factor for late ICU readmission. Comorbidities could not account for the excess mortality associated with ICU readmissions. Crown Copyright (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc. All fights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据