The effect of window rooms on critically ill patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage admitted to intensive care

Hannah Wunsch, Hayley Gershengorn, Stephan A. Mayer, Jan Claassen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Clinicians and specialty societies often emphasize the potential importance of natural light for quality care of critically ill patients, but few studies have examined patient outcomes associated with exposure to natural light. We hypothesized that receiving care in an intensive care unit (ICU) room with a window might improve outcomes for critically ill patients with acute brain injury.Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Seven ICU rooms had windows, and five ICU rooms did not. Admission to a room was based solely on availability.We analyzed data from 789 patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) admitted to the neurological ICU at our hospital from August 1997 to April 2006. Patient information was recorded prospectively at the time of admission, and patients were followed up to 1 year to assess mortality and functional status, stratified by whether care was received in an ICU room with a window.Results: Of 789 SAH patients, 455 (57.7%) received care in a window room and 334 (42.3%) received care in a nonwindow room. The two groups were balanced with regard to all patient and clinical characteristics. There was no statistical difference in modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at hospital discharge, 3 months or 1 year (44.8% with mRS scores of 0 to 3 with window rooms at hospital discharge versus 47.2% with the same scores in nonwindow rooms at hospital discharge; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.67 to 1.50, P = 0.98; 62.7% versus 63.8% at 3 months, aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.26, P = 0.42; 73.6% versus 72.5% at 1 year, aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.19, P = 0.25). There were also no differences in any secondary outcomes, including length of mechanical ventilation, time until the patient was able to follow commands in the ICU, need for percutaneous gastrostomy tube or tracheotomy, ICU and hospital length of stay, and hospital, 3-month and 1-year mortality.Conclusions: The presence of a window in an ICU room did not improve outcomes for critically ill patients with SAH admitted to the ICU. Further studies are needed to determine whether other groups of critically ill patients, particularly those without acute brain injury, derive benefit from natural light.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numberR81
JournalCritical Care
Volume15
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 3 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Critical Care
Critical Illness
Intensive Care Units
Odds Ratio
Confidence Intervals
Light
Brain Injuries
Length of Stay
Tracheotomy
Gastrostomy
Mortality
Quality of Health Care
Patient Admission
Artificial Respiration
Cohort Studies
Prospective Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

The effect of window rooms on critically ill patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage admitted to intensive care. / Wunsch, Hannah; Gershengorn, Hayley; Mayer, Stephan A.; Claassen, Jan.

In: Critical Care, Vol. 15, No. 2, R81, 03.03.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wunsch, Hannah ; Gershengorn, Hayley ; Mayer, Stephan A. ; Claassen, Jan. / The effect of window rooms on critically ill patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage admitted to intensive care. In: Critical Care. 2011 ; Vol. 15, No. 2.
@article{56e13f09020e472b8411ed34db5f4f19,
title = "The effect of window rooms on critically ill patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage admitted to intensive care",
abstract = "Introduction: Clinicians and specialty societies often emphasize the potential importance of natural light for quality care of critically ill patients, but few studies have examined patient outcomes associated with exposure to natural light. We hypothesized that receiving care in an intensive care unit (ICU) room with a window might improve outcomes for critically ill patients with acute brain injury.Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Seven ICU rooms had windows, and five ICU rooms did not. Admission to a room was based solely on availability.We analyzed data from 789 patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) admitted to the neurological ICU at our hospital from August 1997 to April 2006. Patient information was recorded prospectively at the time of admission, and patients were followed up to 1 year to assess mortality and functional status, stratified by whether care was received in an ICU room with a window.Results: Of 789 SAH patients, 455 (57.7{\%}) received care in a window room and 334 (42.3{\%}) received care in a nonwindow room. The two groups were balanced with regard to all patient and clinical characteristics. There was no statistical difference in modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at hospital discharge, 3 months or 1 year (44.8{\%} with mRS scores of 0 to 3 with window rooms at hospital discharge versus 47.2{\%} with the same scores in nonwindow rooms at hospital discharge; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.01, 95{\%} confidence interval (95{\%} CI) 0.67 to 1.50, P = 0.98; 62.7{\%} versus 63.8{\%} at 3 months, aOR 0.85, 95{\%} CI 0.58 to 1.26, P = 0.42; 73.6{\%} versus 72.5{\%} at 1 year, aOR 0.78, 95{\%} CI 0.51 to 1.19, P = 0.25). There were also no differences in any secondary outcomes, including length of mechanical ventilation, time until the patient was able to follow commands in the ICU, need for percutaneous gastrostomy tube or tracheotomy, ICU and hospital length of stay, and hospital, 3-month and 1-year mortality.Conclusions: The presence of a window in an ICU room did not improve outcomes for critically ill patients with SAH admitted to the ICU. Further studies are needed to determine whether other groups of critically ill patients, particularly those without acute brain injury, derive benefit from natural light.",
author = "Hannah Wunsch and Hayley Gershengorn and Mayer, {Stephan A.} and Jan Claassen",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1186/cc10075",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
journal = "Critical Care",
issn = "1466-609X",
publisher = "Springer Science + Business Media",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of window rooms on critically ill patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage admitted to intensive care

AU - Wunsch, Hannah

AU - Gershengorn, Hayley

AU - Mayer, Stephan A.

AU - Claassen, Jan

PY - 2011/3/3

Y1 - 2011/3/3

N2 - Introduction: Clinicians and specialty societies often emphasize the potential importance of natural light for quality care of critically ill patients, but few studies have examined patient outcomes associated with exposure to natural light. We hypothesized that receiving care in an intensive care unit (ICU) room with a window might improve outcomes for critically ill patients with acute brain injury.Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Seven ICU rooms had windows, and five ICU rooms did not. Admission to a room was based solely on availability.We analyzed data from 789 patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) admitted to the neurological ICU at our hospital from August 1997 to April 2006. Patient information was recorded prospectively at the time of admission, and patients were followed up to 1 year to assess mortality and functional status, stratified by whether care was received in an ICU room with a window.Results: Of 789 SAH patients, 455 (57.7%) received care in a window room and 334 (42.3%) received care in a nonwindow room. The two groups were balanced with regard to all patient and clinical characteristics. There was no statistical difference in modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at hospital discharge, 3 months or 1 year (44.8% with mRS scores of 0 to 3 with window rooms at hospital discharge versus 47.2% with the same scores in nonwindow rooms at hospital discharge; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.67 to 1.50, P = 0.98; 62.7% versus 63.8% at 3 months, aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.26, P = 0.42; 73.6% versus 72.5% at 1 year, aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.19, P = 0.25). There were also no differences in any secondary outcomes, including length of mechanical ventilation, time until the patient was able to follow commands in the ICU, need for percutaneous gastrostomy tube or tracheotomy, ICU and hospital length of stay, and hospital, 3-month and 1-year mortality.Conclusions: The presence of a window in an ICU room did not improve outcomes for critically ill patients with SAH admitted to the ICU. Further studies are needed to determine whether other groups of critically ill patients, particularly those without acute brain injury, derive benefit from natural light.

AB - Introduction: Clinicians and specialty societies often emphasize the potential importance of natural light for quality care of critically ill patients, but few studies have examined patient outcomes associated with exposure to natural light. We hypothesized that receiving care in an intensive care unit (ICU) room with a window might improve outcomes for critically ill patients with acute brain injury.Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Seven ICU rooms had windows, and five ICU rooms did not. Admission to a room was based solely on availability.We analyzed data from 789 patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) admitted to the neurological ICU at our hospital from August 1997 to April 2006. Patient information was recorded prospectively at the time of admission, and patients were followed up to 1 year to assess mortality and functional status, stratified by whether care was received in an ICU room with a window.Results: Of 789 SAH patients, 455 (57.7%) received care in a window room and 334 (42.3%) received care in a nonwindow room. The two groups were balanced with regard to all patient and clinical characteristics. There was no statistical difference in modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at hospital discharge, 3 months or 1 year (44.8% with mRS scores of 0 to 3 with window rooms at hospital discharge versus 47.2% with the same scores in nonwindow rooms at hospital discharge; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.67 to 1.50, P = 0.98; 62.7% versus 63.8% at 3 months, aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.26, P = 0.42; 73.6% versus 72.5% at 1 year, aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.19, P = 0.25). There were also no differences in any secondary outcomes, including length of mechanical ventilation, time until the patient was able to follow commands in the ICU, need for percutaneous gastrostomy tube or tracheotomy, ICU and hospital length of stay, and hospital, 3-month and 1-year mortality.Conclusions: The presence of a window in an ICU room did not improve outcomes for critically ill patients with SAH admitted to the ICU. Further studies are needed to determine whether other groups of critically ill patients, particularly those without acute brain injury, derive benefit from natural light.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953326101&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79953326101&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/cc10075

DO - 10.1186/cc10075

M3 - Article

C2 - 21371299

AN - SCOPUS:79953326101

VL - 15

JO - Critical Care

JF - Critical Care

SN - 1466-609X

IS - 2

M1 - R81

ER -