Introduction: Little is known about the quality of healthcare in intensive care units (ICUs) in Poland. Data on patients hospitalized in ICUs in Warsaw and the results of their treatment are scarce. This information, ...Introduction: Little is known about the quality of healthcare in intensive care units (ICUs) in Poland. Data on patients hospitalized in ICUs in Warsaw and the results of their treatment are scarce. This information, crucial for improving the quality of ICU healthcare services, is not collected routinely. Quality indicators are essential in the concept of holistic quality management. Implementation of these indicators in ICUs is a complex and time-consuming process. Systematic increase in demand for quality assessment tools that can reflect real conditions of the practices of ICUs, prompts the search for effective solutions. Methods: The study included 12,155 patients hospitalized in 16 ICUs of Warsaw hospitals (8 ICUs, n = 3293 of the first level of care, and 8 ICUs, n = 8862 of the second level) between 1<sup>st</sup> January 2017 and 31<sup>st</sup> December 2018. ICUs in pediatric and oncological hospitals were excluded from the study. Characteristics and demography of patients as well as the structure, treatment and human resources of the ICUs in Warsaw were analyzed. Length of stay, unexpected extubations, nosocomial infections, ICU readmissions and standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were retrieved from National Health Fund, Ministry of Health, and other public databases. Results: In primary level ICUs patients’ age (66.42 vs. 64.43 years;p = 0.005) and comorbidity rate (30.56% vs. 22.78%, p = 0.037) were higher when compared to ICUs of the second level of care. The crude mortality rate in ICUs in Warsaw was significantly higher than in other EU countries and differed between ICUs of the first and the second level (34.77% vs. 24.53%, respectively;p = 0.004). SMRs were however very low: 0.71 and 0.64 (ns), respectively. ICU readmission rate, unexpected extubations, central catheter related infections, and length of stay were identical in both groups. More patients were admitted to ICU form emergency department and/or discharged home in Level 1 ICUs (18.9% vs 12.9%, p Conclusions: There are no major differences in quality of care provided by Level 1 and Level 2 ICUs in Poland, although more rigorous adhesion to admission and discharge policies is needed. Implementation of the instruments for assessing quality of ICUs including benchmarking, self-assessment of departments and evaluation of changes resulting from audits according to the Deming cycle is of utmost importance. Standardization of quality measures and markers, communication, and cooperation in reporting and creation of ICU medical registers is necessary to improve the quality of healthcare.展开更多
文摘Introduction: Little is known about the quality of healthcare in intensive care units (ICUs) in Poland. Data on patients hospitalized in ICUs in Warsaw and the results of their treatment are scarce. This information, crucial for improving the quality of ICU healthcare services, is not collected routinely. Quality indicators are essential in the concept of holistic quality management. Implementation of these indicators in ICUs is a complex and time-consuming process. Systematic increase in demand for quality assessment tools that can reflect real conditions of the practices of ICUs, prompts the search for effective solutions. Methods: The study included 12,155 patients hospitalized in 16 ICUs of Warsaw hospitals (8 ICUs, n = 3293 of the first level of care, and 8 ICUs, n = 8862 of the second level) between 1<sup>st</sup> January 2017 and 31<sup>st</sup> December 2018. ICUs in pediatric and oncological hospitals were excluded from the study. Characteristics and demography of patients as well as the structure, treatment and human resources of the ICUs in Warsaw were analyzed. Length of stay, unexpected extubations, nosocomial infections, ICU readmissions and standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were retrieved from National Health Fund, Ministry of Health, and other public databases. Results: In primary level ICUs patients’ age (66.42 vs. 64.43 years;p = 0.005) and comorbidity rate (30.56% vs. 22.78%, p = 0.037) were higher when compared to ICUs of the second level of care. The crude mortality rate in ICUs in Warsaw was significantly higher than in other EU countries and differed between ICUs of the first and the second level (34.77% vs. 24.53%, respectively;p = 0.004). SMRs were however very low: 0.71 and 0.64 (ns), respectively. ICU readmission rate, unexpected extubations, central catheter related infections, and length of stay were identical in both groups. More patients were admitted to ICU form emergency department and/or discharged home in Level 1 ICUs (18.9% vs 12.9%, p Conclusions: There are no major differences in quality of care provided by Level 1 and Level 2 ICUs in Poland, although more rigorous adhesion to admission and discharge policies is needed. Implementation of the instruments for assessing quality of ICUs including benchmarking, self-assessment of departments and evaluation of changes resulting from audits according to the Deming cycle is of utmost importance. Standardization of quality measures and markers, communication, and cooperation in reporting and creation of ICU medical registers is necessary to improve the quality of healthcare.
