Variations in Case-Mix–Adjusted Duration of Mechanical Ventilation Among ICUs

Andrew A. Kramer, Hayley B. Gershengorn, Hannah Wunsch, Jack E. Zimmerman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:: To develop a model that predicts the duration of mechanical ventilation and then to use this model to compare observed versus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs. DESIGN:: Retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING:: Eighty-six eligible ICUs at 48 U.S. hospitals. PATIENTS:: ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation on day 1 (n = 56,336) admitted from January 2013 to September 2014. INTERVENTIONS:: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: We developed and validated a multivariable logistic regression model for predicting duration of mechanical ventilation using ICU day 1 patient characteristics. Mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation was then obtained across patients and for each ICU. The accuracy of the model was assessed using R. We defined better performing units as ICUs that had an observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation less than –0.5 days and a p value of less than 0.01; and poorer performing units as ICUs with an observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation greater than +0.5 days and a p value of less than 0.01. The factors accounting for the majority of the model’s explanatory power were diagnosis (71%) and physiologic abnormalities (24%). For individual patients, the difference between observed and mean predicted duration of mechanical ventilation was 3.3 hours (95% CI, 2.8–3.9) with R equal to 21.6%. The mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs was 3.8 hours (95% CI, 2.1–5.5), with R equal to 69.9%. Among the 86 ICUs, 66 (76.7%) had an observed mean mechanical ventilation duration that was within 0.5 days of predicted. Five ICUs had significantly (p <0.01) poorer performance (observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation, > 0.5 d) and 14 ICUs significantly (p <0.01) better performance (observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation, <−0.5 d). CONCLUSIONS:: Comparison of observed and case-mix–adjusted predicted duration of mechanical ventilation can accurately assess and compare duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs, but cannot accurately predict an individual patient’s mechanical ventilation duration. There are substantial differences in duration of mechanical ventilation across ICU and their association with unit practices and processes of care warrants examination.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalCritical Care Medicine
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Mar 2 2016

Fingerprint

Artificial Respiration
Logistic Models
Individuality
Cohort Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Variations in Case-Mix–Adjusted Duration of Mechanical Ventilation Among ICUs. / Kramer, Andrew A.; Gershengorn, Hayley B.; Wunsch, Hannah; Zimmerman, Jack E.

In: Critical Care Medicine, 02.03.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kramer, Andrew A. ; Gershengorn, Hayley B. ; Wunsch, Hannah ; Zimmerman, Jack E. / Variations in Case-Mix–Adjusted Duration of Mechanical Ventilation Among ICUs. In: Critical Care Medicine. 2016.
@article{6d40eb3c4906471eb30b272b522be6c3,
title = "Variations in Case-Mix–Adjusted Duration of Mechanical Ventilation Among ICUs",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES:: To develop a model that predicts the duration of mechanical ventilation and then to use this model to compare observed versus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs. DESIGN:: Retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING:: Eighty-six eligible ICUs at 48 U.S. hospitals. PATIENTS:: ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation on day 1 (n = 56,336) admitted from January 2013 to September 2014. INTERVENTIONS:: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: We developed and validated a multivariable logistic regression model for predicting duration of mechanical ventilation using ICU day 1 patient characteristics. Mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation was then obtained across patients and for each ICU. The accuracy of the model was assessed using R. We defined better performing units as ICUs that had an observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation less than –0.5 days and a p value of less than 0.01; and poorer performing units as ICUs with an observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation greater than +0.5 days and a p value of less than 0.01. The factors accounting for the majority of the model’s explanatory power were diagnosis (71{\%}) and physiologic abnormalities (24{\%}). For individual patients, the difference between observed and mean predicted duration of mechanical ventilation was 3.3 hours (95{\%} CI, 2.8–3.9) with R equal to 21.6{\%}. The mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs was 3.8 hours (95{\%} CI, 2.1–5.5), with R equal to 69.9{\%}. Among the 86 ICUs, 66 (76.7{\%}) had an observed mean mechanical ventilation duration that was within 0.5 days of predicted. Five ICUs had significantly (p <0.01) poorer performance (observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation, > 0.5 d) and 14 ICUs significantly (p <0.01) better performance (observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation, <−0.5 d). CONCLUSIONS:: Comparison of observed and case-mix–adjusted predicted duration of mechanical ventilation can accurately assess and compare duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs, but cannot accurately predict an individual patient’s mechanical ventilation duration. There are substantial differences in duration of mechanical ventilation across ICU and their association with unit practices and processes of care warrants examination.",
author = "Kramer, {Andrew A.} and Gershengorn, {Hayley B.} and Hannah Wunsch and Zimmerman, {Jack E.}",
year = "2016",
month = "3",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1097/CCM.0000000000001636",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Variations in Case-Mix–Adjusted Duration of Mechanical Ventilation Among ICUs

AU - Kramer, Andrew A.

AU - Gershengorn, Hayley B.

AU - Wunsch, Hannah

AU - Zimmerman, Jack E.

PY - 2016/3/2

Y1 - 2016/3/2

N2 - OBJECTIVES:: To develop a model that predicts the duration of mechanical ventilation and then to use this model to compare observed versus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs. DESIGN:: Retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING:: Eighty-six eligible ICUs at 48 U.S. hospitals. PATIENTS:: ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation on day 1 (n = 56,336) admitted from January 2013 to September 2014. INTERVENTIONS:: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: We developed and validated a multivariable logistic regression model for predicting duration of mechanical ventilation using ICU day 1 patient characteristics. Mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation was then obtained across patients and for each ICU. The accuracy of the model was assessed using R. We defined better performing units as ICUs that had an observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation less than –0.5 days and a p value of less than 0.01; and poorer performing units as ICUs with an observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation greater than +0.5 days and a p value of less than 0.01. The factors accounting for the majority of the model’s explanatory power were diagnosis (71%) and physiologic abnormalities (24%). For individual patients, the difference between observed and mean predicted duration of mechanical ventilation was 3.3 hours (95% CI, 2.8–3.9) with R equal to 21.6%. The mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs was 3.8 hours (95% CI, 2.1–5.5), with R equal to 69.9%. Among the 86 ICUs, 66 (76.7%) had an observed mean mechanical ventilation duration that was within 0.5 days of predicted. Five ICUs had significantly (p <0.01) poorer performance (observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation, > 0.5 d) and 14 ICUs significantly (p <0.01) better performance (observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation, <−0.5 d). CONCLUSIONS:: Comparison of observed and case-mix–adjusted predicted duration of mechanical ventilation can accurately assess and compare duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs, but cannot accurately predict an individual patient’s mechanical ventilation duration. There are substantial differences in duration of mechanical ventilation across ICU and their association with unit practices and processes of care warrants examination.

AB - OBJECTIVES:: To develop a model that predicts the duration of mechanical ventilation and then to use this model to compare observed versus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs. DESIGN:: Retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING:: Eighty-six eligible ICUs at 48 U.S. hospitals. PATIENTS:: ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation on day 1 (n = 56,336) admitted from January 2013 to September 2014. INTERVENTIONS:: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: We developed and validated a multivariable logistic regression model for predicting duration of mechanical ventilation using ICU day 1 patient characteristics. Mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation was then obtained across patients and for each ICU. The accuracy of the model was assessed using R. We defined better performing units as ICUs that had an observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation less than –0.5 days and a p value of less than 0.01; and poorer performing units as ICUs with an observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation greater than +0.5 days and a p value of less than 0.01. The factors accounting for the majority of the model’s explanatory power were diagnosis (71%) and physiologic abnormalities (24%). For individual patients, the difference between observed and mean predicted duration of mechanical ventilation was 3.3 hours (95% CI, 2.8–3.9) with R equal to 21.6%. The mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs was 3.8 hours (95% CI, 2.1–5.5), with R equal to 69.9%. Among the 86 ICUs, 66 (76.7%) had an observed mean mechanical ventilation duration that was within 0.5 days of predicted. Five ICUs had significantly (p <0.01) poorer performance (observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation, > 0.5 d) and 14 ICUs significantly (p <0.01) better performance (observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation, <−0.5 d). CONCLUSIONS:: Comparison of observed and case-mix–adjusted predicted duration of mechanical ventilation can accurately assess and compare duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs, but cannot accurately predict an individual patient’s mechanical ventilation duration. There are substantial differences in duration of mechanical ventilation across ICU and their association with unit practices and processes of care warrants examination.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960157425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84960157425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001636

DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001636

M3 - Article

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

ER -