TY - JOUR
T1 - Utilisation of Intermediate Care Units
T2 - A Systematic Review
AU - Plate, Joost D J
AU - Leenen, Luke P H
AU - Houwert, Marijn
AU - Hietbrink, Falco
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Joost D. J. Plate et al.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Background. The diversity in formats of Intermediate Care Units (IMCUs) makes it difficult to compare data from different settings. The purpose of this article was to describe and quantify these different formations and utilisation. Methods. We performed a systematic review extracting geographic location, nomenclature used, admitting specialties, open (admitting specialist in charge) or closed (intensivist/generalist in charge) management format, location in hospital, number of beds, nursing workload, medical staff to patient ratios, and modalities-possibilities and limitations-implemented. Results. Nomenclature used was High Dependency Unit (56.8%) or Intermediate Care Unit (24.3%), with the latter one increasingly being used recently. The median number of beds was 6 (IQR 4-10). Location (p < 0.001) and admitting specialties (p = 0.03) were related to the management format. IMCUs integrated or adjacent to Intensive Care Units were more often capable of using single vasoactive medication (p = 0.025). The mean nurse to patient ratio was 1 to 2.5. Conclusions. IMCUs often have a specific task in a hospital, which is reflected in location, format, and utilisation. The management format depends on location and admitting specialist while incorporated supportive treatment modules reflect its function. Common IMCU denominators are continuous monitoring and respiratory support, without mechanical ventilation and multiple vasoactive medications.
AB - Background. The diversity in formats of Intermediate Care Units (IMCUs) makes it difficult to compare data from different settings. The purpose of this article was to describe and quantify these different formations and utilisation. Methods. We performed a systematic review extracting geographic location, nomenclature used, admitting specialties, open (admitting specialist in charge) or closed (intensivist/generalist in charge) management format, location in hospital, number of beds, nursing workload, medical staff to patient ratios, and modalities-possibilities and limitations-implemented. Results. Nomenclature used was High Dependency Unit (56.8%) or Intermediate Care Unit (24.3%), with the latter one increasingly being used recently. The median number of beds was 6 (IQR 4-10). Location (p < 0.001) and admitting specialties (p = 0.03) were related to the management format. IMCUs integrated or adjacent to Intensive Care Units were more often capable of using single vasoactive medication (p = 0.025). The mean nurse to patient ratio was 1 to 2.5. Conclusions. IMCUs often have a specific task in a hospital, which is reflected in location, format, and utilisation. The management format depends on location and admitting specialist while incorporated supportive treatment modules reflect its function. Common IMCU denominators are continuous monitoring and respiratory support, without mechanical ventilation and multiple vasoactive medications.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026496693&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1155/2017/8038460
DO - 10.1155/2017/8038460
M3 - Review article
C2 - 28775898
SN - 2090-1305
VL - 2017
JO - Critical Care Research and Practice
JF - Critical Care Research and Practice
M1 - 8038460
ER -