Triaging patients to the ICU: a pilot study of factors influencing admission decisions and patient outcomes
- 590 Downloads
To assess the appropriateness of ICU triage decisions.
Prospective descriptive single-center study.
Ten-bed, medical-surgical ICU in an acute-care 460-bed, tertiary care hospital.
All patients triaged for admission were entered prospectively.
Measurements and main results
Age, underlying diseases, admission diagnoses, Mortality Probability Model (MPM0) score, information available to ICU physicians, and mortality were recorded. Of the 334 patients (96% medical), 145 (46.4%) were refused. Reasons for refusal were being too-sick-to-benefit (48, 14%) and too-well-to-benefit (93, 28%). Factors independently associated with refusal were patient location, ICU physician seniority, bed availability, patient age, underlying diseases, and disability. Hospital mortality was 23% and 27% for patients admitted to our ICU and other ICUs, respectively, and 7.5% and 60% for patients too well and too sick to benefit, respectively. In the multivariate Cox model, McCabe = 1 [hazard ratio (HR), 0.44 (95% CI, 0.24–0.77), P=0.001], living at home without help (HR, 0.440, 95% CI, 0.28–0.68, P=0.0003), and immunosuppression (HR, 1.91, 95% CI, 1.09–3.33, P=0.02) were independent predictors of hospital death. Neither later ICU admission nor refusal was associated with cohort survival. MPM0 was not associated with hospital mortality.
Refusal of ICU admission was related to the ability of the triaging physician to examine the patient, ICU physician seniority, patient age, underlying diseases, self-sufficiency, and number of beds available. Specific training of junior physicians in triaging might bring further improvements. Scores that are more accurate than the MPM0 are needed.
KeywordsIntensive care unit Triage Ethics Hospital bed capacity Decision-making Mortality
The authors thank Dr Antoinette Wolfe, for her help in preparing this manuscript and Corinne Alberti for her statistical comments.
- 4.Society of Critical Care Medicine Task Force on guidelines (1988) Recommendations for intensive care unit admissions and discharge criteria. Crit Care Med 16:807–808Google Scholar
- 6.Task force of the American college of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Critical Care Medicine (1999) Guidelines for intensive care unit admission, discharge, and triage. Crit Care Med 27:633–638Google Scholar
- 8.Sprung CL, Geber D, Eidelman LA, Baras M, Pizov R, Nimrod A, et al (1999) Evaluation of triage decisions for intensive care admission. Crit Care Med 27:1073–1079Google Scholar
- 9.McCabe WR, Jackson GG (1962) Gram-negative bacteremia: etiology and ecology. Arch Intern Med 110:847–855Google Scholar
- 13.Levin PD, Sprung CL (2001) The process of intensive care triage. Intensive Care Med 27:1441–1445Google Scholar
- 14.Joynt GM, Gomersall CD, Tan P, Lee A, Ai Yu Cheng C, Lai Yi Wong E (2001) Prospective evaluation of patients refused admission to an intensive care unit: triage, futility and outcome. Intensive Care Med 27:1459–1465Google Scholar
- 16.Kruse JA, Thill-Baharozian MC, Carlson RW (1989) Comparison of clinical assessment with APACHE II for predicting mortality risk in patients admitted to a medical intensive care unit. JAMA 260:1739–1742Google Scholar
- 19.Rodriguez RM, Wang E, Pearl RG (1997) Prediction of poor outcome of intensive care unit patients admitted from the emergency department. Crit Care Med 25:1801–1806Google Scholar
- 22.Konopad E, Noseworthy TW, Johnston R, Shustack A, Grace M (1995) Quality of life measures before and one year after admission to an intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 23:1653–1659Google Scholar
- 24.Zaren B, Hedstrand U (1987) Quality of life among long terms survivors of intensive care. Crit Care Med 15:743–747Google Scholar