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
. 2013 Apr;28(2):202-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2012.07.027. Epub 2012 Oct 17.

Reasons underlying interhospital transfers to an academic medical intensive care unit

Affiliations

Reasons underlying interhospital transfers to an academic medical intensive care unit

Jason Wagner et al. J Crit Care. 2013 Apr.

Abstract

Purpose: Interhospital critical care transfers are common, yet few studies address the underlying reasons for transfers. We examined clinician and patient/surrogate perceptions about interhospital transfers and assessed their agreement on these transfers.

Materials and methods: This is a mixed-mode survey of 3 major stakeholders in interhospital transfers to an academic medical intensive care unit from August 2007 to April 2008.

Results: Sixty-two hospitals transferred 138 patients during the study period. Response rates varied among stakeholders (accepting physician, 90%; referring physicians, 20%; patients/surrogates, 33%). All 3 groups frequently endorsed quality of care and need for a specific test/procedure as important. Referring hospital reputation and quality were rarely endorsed. Accepting physicians and patients/surrogates substantially agreed on the need for a specific test (κ = 0.70) and increased survival (κ = 0.78) but, otherwise, had fair to poor agreement. Referring physicians and patients/surrogates rarely agreed and sometimes disagreed greater than expected by chance (κ < 0). Physician pairs strongly agreed on the importance of accepting hospital experience (κ = 0.96) but agreed less on patient satisfaction at the referring hospital (κ = 0.37) and referring hospital reputation (κ = 0.35).

Conclusions: Stakeholders do not always agree on the reasons for critical care transfers. Efforts to improve communication are warranted to ensure informed patient choices.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Financial Support: We have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Percent of accepting physicians (n=124), referring physicians (n=27), and patients/surrogates (n=46) rating a reason for inter-hospital ICU transfer as important

References

    1. Iwashyna TJ, et al. The structure of critical care transfer networks. Med Care. 2009;47(7):787–93. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Iwashyna TJ, Courey AJ. Guided transfer of critically ill patients: where patients are transferred can be an informed choice. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2011 - PubMed
    1. Iwashyna TJ, et al. Uncharted paths: hospital networks in critical care. Chest. 2009;135(3):827–33. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Manthous CA. Leapfrog and critical care: evidence- and reality-based intensive care for the 21st century. Am J Med. 2004;116(3):188–93. - PubMed
    1. Gasperino J. The Leapfrog initiative for intensive care unit physician staffing and its impact on intensive care unit performance: A narrative review. Health Policy. 2011;102(2–3):223–8. - PubMed

Publication types