Evidence Hub

Characteristics of patients and use of resource in French pediatric intensive care units. Le groupe francophone de Rèanimation et urgences pédiatriques

Martinot A, Leteurtre S, Grandbastien B, Duhamel A, Leclerc F

Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie, 1997

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Evaluation of case-mix and resource consumption in pediatric intensive care units (ICU) is required.

AIMS: This study describes the patterns of pediatric ICU resource consumption, determines the impact of primary clinical characteristics (particularly severity of illness) on resource utilization, and analyses medical efficiency with the frequency of inappropriate stays in French pediatric ICU.

METHODS: Prospective study in nine French volunteer multidisciplinary pediatric ICUs from December 1993 to April 1994. Premature neonates were excluded. Resource consumption was expressed using the Omega system and length of stay, from which total Omega per admission, and average daily Omega (total Omega/length of stay) were obtained.

RESULTS: Seven hundred and twelve patients were eligible. Twenty-five percent were full-term neonates, 30% infants (1 month to 1 year), and 45% children. Surgical patients constituted 22% of the population. A chronic disease was present in 45% of infants and children. Immunodeficiency was present in 10% of patients. The median length of stay was 4 days (range: 1-155). The mean Omega scores per admission were: total Omega = 92 +/- 124, Omega/day = 14 +/- 9. Sixty-four percent required mechanical ventilation and 37% during more than 2 days. Forty-two percent had a central venous access, and 23% an arterial line. The resource consumption was greater in non-survivors, surgical patients, neonates, and immunosuppressed patients. The mean PRISM score…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free