Impact of nonphysician staffing on outcomes in a medical ICU

Hayley B. Gershengorn, Hannah Wunsch, Romina Wahab, David Leaf, Daniel Brodie, Guohua Li, Phillip Factor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

67 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: As the number of ICU beds and demand for intensivists increase, alternative solutions are needed to provide coverage for critically ill patients. The impact of different staffing models on the outcomes of patients in the medical ICU (MICU) remains unknown. In our study, we compare outcomes of nonphysician provider-based teams to those of medical house staff-based teams in the MICU. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 590 daytime (7:00 AM -7:00 PM) admissions to two MICUs at one hospital. In one MICU staffed by nurse practitioners and physician assistants (MICU-NP/PA) there were nonphysicians (nurse practitioners and physicians assistants) during the day (7:00 AM -7:00 PM) with attending physician coverage overnight. In the other MICU, there were medicine residents (MICU-RES) (24 h/d). The outcomes investigated were hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS) (ICU, hospital), and posthospital discharge destination. Results: Three hundred two patients were admitted to the MICU-NP/PA and 288 to the MICU-RES. Mortality probability model III (MPM0-III) predicted mortality was similar (P = .14). There was no significant difference in hospital mortality (32.1% for MICU-NP/PA vs 32.3% for MICU-RES, P = .96), MICU LOS (4.22 ± 2.51 days for MICU-NP/PA vs 4.44 ± 3.10 days for MICU-RES, P = .59), or hospital LOS (14.01 ± 2.92 days for MICU-NP/PA vs 13.74 ± 2.94 days for MICU-RES, P = .86). Discharge to a skilled care facility (vs home) was similar (37.1% for MICU-NP/PA vs 32.5% for MICU-RES, P = .34). After multivariate adjustment, MICU staffing type was not associated with hospital mortality (P = .26), MICU LOS (P = .29), hospital LOS (P = .19), or posthospital discharge destination (P = .90). Conclusions: Staffing models including daytime use of nonphysician providers appear to be a safe and effective alternative to the traditional house staff-based team in a high-acuity, adult ICU.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1347-1353
Number of pages7
JournalChest
Volume139
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Physician Assistants
Nurse Practitioners
Length of Stay
Hospital Mortality
Internship and Residency
Mortality
Medical Staff
Critical Illness
Medicine
Physicians

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Gershengorn, H. B., Wunsch, H., Wahab, R., Leaf, D., Brodie, D., Li, G., & Factor, P. (2011). Impact of nonphysician staffing on outcomes in a medical ICU. Chest, 139(6), 1347-1353. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.10-2648

Impact of nonphysician staffing on outcomes in a medical ICU. / Gershengorn, Hayley B.; Wunsch, Hannah; Wahab, Romina; Leaf, David; Brodie, Daniel; Li, Guohua; Factor, Phillip.

In: Chest, Vol. 139, No. 6, 01.06.2011, p. 1347-1353.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gershengorn, HB, Wunsch, H, Wahab, R, Leaf, D, Brodie, D, Li, G & Factor, P 2011, 'Impact of nonphysician staffing on outcomes in a medical ICU', Chest, vol. 139, no. 6, pp. 1347-1353. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.10-2648
Gershengorn HB, Wunsch H, Wahab R, Leaf D, Brodie D, Li G et al. Impact of nonphysician staffing on outcomes in a medical ICU. Chest. 2011 Jun 1;139(6):1347-1353. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.10-2648
Gershengorn, Hayley B. ; Wunsch, Hannah ; Wahab, Romina ; Leaf, David ; Brodie, Daniel ; Li, Guohua ; Factor, Phillip. / Impact of nonphysician staffing on outcomes in a medical ICU. In: Chest. 2011 ; Vol. 139, No. 6. pp. 1347-1353.
@article{e31cac7dd95b4b56a99c6936292c75fa,
title = "Impact of nonphysician staffing on outcomes in a medical ICU",
abstract = "Background: As the number of ICU beds and demand for intensivists increase, alternative solutions are needed to provide coverage for critically ill patients. The impact of different staffing models on the outcomes of patients in the medical ICU (MICU) remains unknown. In our study, we compare outcomes of nonphysician provider-based teams to those of medical house staff-based teams in the MICU. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 590 daytime (7:00 AM -7:00 PM) admissions to two MICUs at one hospital. In one MICU staffed by nurse practitioners and physician assistants (MICU-NP/PA) there were nonphysicians (nurse practitioners and physicians assistants) during the day (7:00 AM -7:00 PM) with attending physician coverage overnight. In the other MICU, there were medicine residents (MICU-RES) (24 h/d). The outcomes investigated were hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS) (ICU, hospital), and posthospital discharge destination. Results: Three hundred two patients were admitted to the MICU-NP/PA and 288 to the MICU-RES. Mortality probability model III (MPM0-III) predicted mortality was similar (P = .14). There was no significant difference in hospital mortality (32.1{\%} for MICU-NP/PA vs 32.3{\%} for MICU-RES, P = .96), MICU LOS (4.22 ± 2.51 days for MICU-NP/PA vs 4.44 ± 3.10 days for MICU-RES, P = .59), or hospital LOS (14.01 ± 2.92 days for MICU-NP/PA vs 13.74 ± 2.94 days for MICU-RES, P = .86). Discharge to a skilled care facility (vs home) was similar (37.1{\%} for MICU-NP/PA vs 32.5{\%} for MICU-RES, P = .34). After multivariate adjustment, MICU staffing type was not associated with hospital mortality (P = .26), MICU LOS (P = .29), hospital LOS (P = .19), or posthospital discharge destination (P = .90). Conclusions: Staffing models including daytime use of nonphysician providers appear to be a safe and effective alternative to the traditional house staff-based team in a high-acuity, adult ICU.",
author = "Gershengorn, {Hayley B.} and Hannah Wunsch and Romina Wahab and David Leaf and Daniel Brodie and Guohua Li and Phillip Factor",
year = "2011",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1378/chest.10-2648",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "139",
pages = "1347--1353",
journal = "Chest",
issn = "0012-3692",
publisher = "American College of Chest Physicians",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Impact of nonphysician staffing on outcomes in a medical ICU

AU - Gershengorn, Hayley B.

AU - Wunsch, Hannah

AU - Wahab, Romina

AU - Leaf, David

AU - Brodie, Daniel

AU - Li, Guohua

AU - Factor, Phillip

PY - 2011/6/1

Y1 - 2011/6/1

N2 - Background: As the number of ICU beds and demand for intensivists increase, alternative solutions are needed to provide coverage for critically ill patients. The impact of different staffing models on the outcomes of patients in the medical ICU (MICU) remains unknown. In our study, we compare outcomes of nonphysician provider-based teams to those of medical house staff-based teams in the MICU. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 590 daytime (7:00 AM -7:00 PM) admissions to two MICUs at one hospital. In one MICU staffed by nurse practitioners and physician assistants (MICU-NP/PA) there were nonphysicians (nurse practitioners and physicians assistants) during the day (7:00 AM -7:00 PM) with attending physician coverage overnight. In the other MICU, there were medicine residents (MICU-RES) (24 h/d). The outcomes investigated were hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS) (ICU, hospital), and posthospital discharge destination. Results: Three hundred two patients were admitted to the MICU-NP/PA and 288 to the MICU-RES. Mortality probability model III (MPM0-III) predicted mortality was similar (P = .14). There was no significant difference in hospital mortality (32.1% for MICU-NP/PA vs 32.3% for MICU-RES, P = .96), MICU LOS (4.22 ± 2.51 days for MICU-NP/PA vs 4.44 ± 3.10 days for MICU-RES, P = .59), or hospital LOS (14.01 ± 2.92 days for MICU-NP/PA vs 13.74 ± 2.94 days for MICU-RES, P = .86). Discharge to a skilled care facility (vs home) was similar (37.1% for MICU-NP/PA vs 32.5% for MICU-RES, P = .34). After multivariate adjustment, MICU staffing type was not associated with hospital mortality (P = .26), MICU LOS (P = .29), hospital LOS (P = .19), or posthospital discharge destination (P = .90). Conclusions: Staffing models including daytime use of nonphysician providers appear to be a safe and effective alternative to the traditional house staff-based team in a high-acuity, adult ICU.

AB - Background: As the number of ICU beds and demand for intensivists increase, alternative solutions are needed to provide coverage for critically ill patients. The impact of different staffing models on the outcomes of patients in the medical ICU (MICU) remains unknown. In our study, we compare outcomes of nonphysician provider-based teams to those of medical house staff-based teams in the MICU. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 590 daytime (7:00 AM -7:00 PM) admissions to two MICUs at one hospital. In one MICU staffed by nurse practitioners and physician assistants (MICU-NP/PA) there were nonphysicians (nurse practitioners and physicians assistants) during the day (7:00 AM -7:00 PM) with attending physician coverage overnight. In the other MICU, there were medicine residents (MICU-RES) (24 h/d). The outcomes investigated were hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS) (ICU, hospital), and posthospital discharge destination. Results: Three hundred two patients were admitted to the MICU-NP/PA and 288 to the MICU-RES. Mortality probability model III (MPM0-III) predicted mortality was similar (P = .14). There was no significant difference in hospital mortality (32.1% for MICU-NP/PA vs 32.3% for MICU-RES, P = .96), MICU LOS (4.22 ± 2.51 days for MICU-NP/PA vs 4.44 ± 3.10 days for MICU-RES, P = .59), or hospital LOS (14.01 ± 2.92 days for MICU-NP/PA vs 13.74 ± 2.94 days for MICU-RES, P = .86). Discharge to a skilled care facility (vs home) was similar (37.1% for MICU-NP/PA vs 32.5% for MICU-RES, P = .34). After multivariate adjustment, MICU staffing type was not associated with hospital mortality (P = .26), MICU LOS (P = .29), hospital LOS (P = .19), or posthospital discharge destination (P = .90). Conclusions: Staffing models including daytime use of nonphysician providers appear to be a safe and effective alternative to the traditional house staff-based team in a high-acuity, adult ICU.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79958729376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79958729376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1378/chest.10-2648

DO - 10.1378/chest.10-2648

M3 - Article

C2 - 21393397

AN - SCOPUS:79958729376

VL - 139

SP - 1347

EP - 1353

JO - Chest

JF - Chest

SN - 0012-3692

IS - 6

ER -