Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2007;11(5):R113.
doi: 10.1186/cc6163.

The impact of the introduction of critical care outreach services in England: a multicentre interrupted time-series analysis

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

The impact of the introduction of critical care outreach services in England: a multicentre interrupted time-series analysis

Haiyan Gao et al. Crit Care. 2007.

Abstract

Introduction: Critical care outreach services (CCOS) have been widely introduced in England with little rigorous evaluation. We undertook a multicentre interrupted time-series analysis of the impact of CCOS, as characterised by the case mix, outcome and activity of admissions to adult, general critical care units in England.

Methods: Data from the Case Mix Programme Database (CMPD) were linked with the results of a survey on the evolution of CCOS in England. Over 350,000 admissions to 172 units between 1996 and 2004 were extracted from the CMPD. The start date of CCOS, activities performed, coverage and staffing were identified from survey data and other sources. Individual patient-level data in the CMPD were collapsed into a monthly time series for each unit (panel data). Population-averaged panel-data models were fitted using a generalised estimating equation approach. Various potential outcomes reflecting possible objectives of the CCOS were investigated in three subgroups of admissions: all admissions to the unit, admissions from the ward, and unit survivors discharged to the ward. The primary comparison was between periods when a formal CCOS was and was not present. Secondary analyses considered specific CCOS activities, coverage and staffing.

Results: In all, 108 units were included in the analysis, of which 79 had formal CCOS starting between 1996 and 2004. For admissions from the ward, CCOS were associated with significant decreases in the proportion of admissions receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation before admission (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 0.96), admission out of hours (odds ratio 0.91, 0.84 to 0.97) and mean Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre physiology score (decrease in mean 1.22, 0.31 to 2.12). There was no significant change in unit mortality (odds ratio 0.97, 0.87 to 1.08) and no significant, sustained effects on outcomes for unit survivors discharged alive to the ward.

Conclusion: The observational nature of the study limits its ability to infer causality. Although associations were observed with characteristics of patients admitted to critical care units, there was no clear evidence that CCOS have a big impact on the outcomes of these patients, or for characteristics of what should form the optimal CCOS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The effect of critical care outreach services (CCOS) for all admissions to the unit. Effect estimate (odds ratio) and 95% confidence interval are shown for the first, second, and third and subsequent months after the introduction of CCOS.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The effect of critical care outreach services (CCOS) for admissions from the ward. Effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals are shown for the first, second, and third and subsequent months after the introduction of CCOS. CPR, cardiopulmonary resuscitation; ICNARC, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre; ICU, intensive care unit.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The effect of critical care outreach services (CCOS) for unit survivors discharged to the ward. Effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals are shown for the first, second, and third and subsequent months after the introduction of CCOS.

Comment in

References

    1. Department of Health . Comprehensive Critical Care: a review of adult critical care services. London: Department of Health; 2000.
    1. Department of Health and NHS Modernisation Agency . The National Outreach Report 2003. London: Department of Health; 2003.
    1. McDonnell A, Esmonde L, Morgan R, Brown R, Bray K, Parry G, Adam S, Sinclair R, Harvey S, Mays N, et al. The provision of critical care outreach services in England: findings from a national survey. J Crit Care. 2007;22:212–218. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2007.02.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Esmonde L, McDonnell A, Ball C, Waskett C, Morgan R, Rashidian A, Bray K, Adam S, Harvey S. Investigating the effectiveness of critical care outreach services: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med. 2006;32:1713–1721. doi: 10.1007/s00134-006-0380-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Harrison DA, Brady AR, Rowan K. Case mix, outcome and length of stay for admissions to adult, general critical care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre Case Mix Programme Database. Crit Care. 2004;8:R99–R111. doi: 10.1186/cc2834. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms