Society of Critical Care Medicine 2024 Guidelines on Adult ICU Design
- PMID: 39982130
- DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006572
Society of Critical Care Medicine 2024 Guidelines on Adult ICU Design
Abstract
Rationale: Advances in technology, infection control challenges-as with the COVID-19 pandemic-and evolutions in patient- and family-centered care highlight ideal aspects of ICU design and opportunities for enhancement.
Objectives: To provide evidence-based recommendations for clinicians, administrators, and healthcare architects to optimize design strategies in new or renovation projects.
Panel design: A guidelines panel of 27 members with experience in ICU design met virtually from the panel's inception in 2019 to 2024. The panel represented clinical professionals, architects, engineers, and clinician methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. A formal conflict of interest policy was followed throughout the guidelines-development process.
Methods: Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Central, and Proquest were searched from database inception to September 2023. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to determine certainty in the evidence and to formulate recommendations, suggestions, and practice statements for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) question based on quality of evidence and panel consensus. Recommendations were provided when evidence was actionable; suggestions, when evidence was equivocal; and practice statements when the benefits of the intervention appeared to outweigh the risks, but direct evidence to support the intervention did not exist.
Results: The ICU Guidelines panel issued 17 recommendations based on 15 PICO questions relating to ICU architecture and design. The panel strongly recommends high-visibility ICU layouts, windows and natural lighting in all patient rooms to enhance sleep and recovery. The panel suggests integrated staff break/respite spaces, advanced infection prevention features, and flexible surge capacity. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel could not make a recommendation around in-room supplies, decentralized charting, and advanced heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems.
Conclusions: This ICU design guidelines is intended to provide expert guidance for clinicians, administrators, and healthcare architects considering erecting a new ICU or revising an existing structure.
Copyright © 2025 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) required all guideline task force members to attest to a declaration of interest statement including all current and past financial conflicts of interest (COI) within 2 years before joining the guideline development process. No task force members reported any financial COI related to the development and writing of the guideline. All members were allowed to participate in all discussions and had equal weight in formulating the statements and voting. We allowed members to exclude themselves from discussion and voting around specific questions if they felt important academic COI. There was no input or funding from industry to produce this guideline. The COI forms are available from the SCCM and are updated on a regular basis. Dr. Anderson reports grant funding from the Alzheimer’s Association (AACSF-22-923724) related to the design of community spaces for older adults and innovation funding from Mass General Brigham related to ICU design and delirium; she received funding from Ovid BP. Dr. Oczkowski received funding from Fisher & Paykel. Dr. Bassin received funding from CannonDesign. Dr. Busl received funding from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (U01NS124613 [AWD14238], NIH R01NS120924 [AWD10089]) related to management of headache for patients with acute subarachnoid hemorrhage in the ICU and the American Academy of Neurology; she disclosed that she is Associate Editor for Critical Care Medicine. Dr. Kaplan disclosed he is Chair, Scientific Review panel for the Congressionally Directed Medical Review Panel; a participant in a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded exploration of hospital room features to improve infection control; and he is a past-President of the SCCM, an Associate Editor for Critical Care Explorations, and an editorial board member of Critical Care Medicine. Dr. Gunnerson serves on the Council of the SCCM. Dr. Jabaley is an editorial board member of Critical Care Medicine and Critical Care Explorations. Dr. Swoboda serves on Board of American College of Critical Care Medicine. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. A guidelines panel of 27 members with experience in ICU design met virtually from the panel’s inception in 2019 to 2024. The panel represented clinical professionals, architects, engineers, and clinician methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. A formal conflict of interest policy was followed throughout the guidelines-development process.
References
-
- Alhazzani W, Evans L, Alshamsi F, et al.: Surviving sepsis campaign guidelines on the management of adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the ICU: First update. Crit Care Med 2021; 49:e219–e234
-
- Mikkelsen ME, Devlin JW: The A2F bundle: Quantity and quality matter. Crit Care Med 2021; 49:380–382
-
- Guidelines for Intensive Care Unit Design: Guidelines/practice parameters committee of the American College of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med 1995; 23:582–588
-
- Thompson DR, Hamilton DK, Cadenhead CD, et al.: Guidelines for intensive care unit design. Crit Care Med 2012; 40:1586–1600
-
- Bass GA, Chang CWJ, Winkle JM, et al.: In-hospital violence and its impact on critical care practitioners. Crit Care Med 2024; 52:1113–1126
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical