Frequency, risk factors, and outcomes of early unplanned readmissions to PICUs
- PMID: 23982030
- PMCID: PMC4327890
- DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31829eb970
Frequency, risk factors, and outcomes of early unplanned readmissions to PICUs
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the rate of unplanned PICU readmissions, examine the characteristics of index admissions associated with readmission, and compare outcomes of readmissions versus index admissions.
Design: Retrospective cohort analysis.
Setting: Ninety North American PICUs that participated in the Virtual Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Systems.
Patients: One hundred five thousand four hundred thirty-seven admissions between July 2009 and March 2011.
Interventions: None.
Measurements and main results: Unplanned PICU readmission within 48 hours of index discharge was the primary outcome. Summary statistics, bivariate analyses, and mixed-effects logistic regression model with random effects for each hospital were performed.There were 1,161 readmissions (1.2%). The readmission rate varied among PICUs (0-3.3%), and acute respiratory (56%), infectious (35%), neurological (28%), and cardiovascular (20%) diagnoses were often present on readmission. Readmission risk increased in patients with two or more complex chronic conditions (adjusted odds ratio, 1.72; p < 0.001), unscheduled index admission (adjusted odds ratio, 1.37; p < 0.001), and transfer to an intermediate unit (adjusted odds ratio, 1.29; p = 0.004, compared with ward). Trauma patients had a decreased risk of readmission (adjusted odds ratio, 0.67; p = 0.003). Gender, race, insurance, age more than 6 months, perioperative status, and nighttime transfer were not associated with readmission. Compared with index admissions, readmissions had longer median PICU length of stay (3.1 vs 1.7 d, p < 0.001) and higher mortality (4% vs 2.5%, p = 0.002).
Conclusions: Unplanned PICU readmissions were relatively uncommon, but were associated with worse outcomes. Several patient and admission characteristics were associated with readmission. These data help identify high-risk patient groups and inform risk-adjustment for standardized readmission rates.
Conflict of interest statement
The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.
Comment in
-
Back to the PICU: who is at risk and outcome of unplanned readmissions.Crit Care Med. 2013 Dec;41(12):2831-2. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182a26505. Crit Care Med. 2013. PMID: 24275400 No abstract available.
References
-
- [Accessed July 13, 2012];National Quality Forum: NQF Endorses All-Cause Unplanned Readmissions Measures. Available at: http://www.qualityforum.org/News_And_Resources/Press_Releases/2012/NQF_E....
-
- [Accessed July 11, 2012];Partnership for Patients: Better Care, Lower Costs. 2011 Available at: http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2011/04/partnership04122011a.html.
-
- [Accessed July 11, 2012];CHIPRA Measures by CHIPRA Categories: Initial Core Set and PQMP CoE Measure Assignments. 2012 Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/chipra/pqmpmeasures.html.
-
- SCCM Quality Indicators Committee: Candidate Critical Care Quality Indicators. Anaheim, CA: Society of Critical Care Medicine; 1995.
-
- Lacey S, Smith JB, Cox KS. Pediatric safety and quality. In: Hughes RG, editor. Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook for Nurses. Rockville, MD: AHRQ Publication; 2008. pp. 1–30.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
