» Articles » PMID: 23034103

Effect of Non-clinical Inter-hospital Critical Care Unit to Unit Transfer of Critically Ill Patients: a Propensity-matched Cohort Analysis

Overview
Journal Crit Care
Specialty Critical Care
Date 2012 Oct 5
PMID 23034103
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: No matter how well resourced, individual hospitals cannot expect to meet all peaks in demand for adult general critical care. However, previous analyses suggest that patients transferred for non-clinical reasons have worse outcomes than those who are not transferred, but these studies were underpowered and hampered by residual case-mix differences. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of transferring adult general critical care patients to other hospitals for non-clinical reasons.

Methods: We carried out a propensity-matched cohort analysis comparing critical care patients who underwent a non-clinical critical care unit to unit transfer to another hospital with those who were not transferred. The primary outcome measure was mortality at ultimate discharge from acute hospital. Secondary outcomes were mortality at ultimate discharge from critical care, plus length of stay in both critical care and acute hospital.

Results: A total of 308,323 patients were admitted to one of 198 adult general critical care units in England and Wales between January 2008 and September 2011. This included 759 patients who underwent a non-clinical transfer within 48 hours of admission to the unit and 1,518 propensity-matched patients who were not transferred. The relative risk of ultimate acute hospital mortality was 1.01 (95% confidence interval = 0.87 to 1.16) for the non-clinical transfer group, compared with patients who were not transferred but had a similar propensity for transfer. There was no statistically significant difference in ultimate critical care unit mortality. Transferred patients received on average three additional days of critical care (P < 0.001) but the difference in length of acute hospital stay was of only borderline significance (P = 0.05).

Conclusion: In our analysis the difference in mortality between non-clinical transferred and nontransferred patients was not statistically significant. Nevertheless, non-clinical transfers received, on average, an additional 3 days of critical care. This has potential ramifications in terms of distress, inconvenience and cost for patients, their families, and the National Health Service. We therefore need further evidence, including qualitative data from family members and cost-effective analyses, to better understand the broader effects of non-clinical transfer.

Citing Articles

Interhospital transports and mortality in patients with critical COVID-19: a single-centre cohort study.

Toss Agegard L, Berggren K, Cronhjort M, Joelsson-Alm E, Sackey P, Jonmarker S BMJ Open. 2025; 15(2):e090952.

PMID: 39965950 PMC: 11836867. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-090952.


Circumstantial risk factors for death after intensive care unit-to-unit inter-hospital transfer-a Swedish registry study.

Sternley J, Stattin K, Petzold M, Oras J, Rylander C Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2025; 33(1):14.

PMID: 39881339 PMC: 11780853. DOI: 10.1186/s13049-025-01325-2.


Unit-to-unit transfer due to shortage of intensive care beds in Sweden 2015-2019 was associated with a lower risk of death but a longer intensive care stay compared to no transfer: a registry study.

Rylander C, Sternley J, Petzold M, Oras J J Intensive Care. 2024; 12(1):10.

PMID: 38409081 PMC: 10898117. DOI: 10.1186/s40560-024-00722-6.


Safety of interhospital transfer for critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Perschinka F, Niedermoser H, Peer A, Lehner G, Mayerhofer T, Stollnberger V Crit Care. 2023; 27(1):456.

PMID: 37996945 PMC: 10666401. DOI: 10.1186/s13054-023-04735-9.


Comparison of patient characteristics and long-term mortality between transferred and non-transferred COVID-19 patients in Dutch intensive care units: A national cohort study.

Wortel S, Bakhshi-Raiez F, Termorshuizen F, de Lange D, Dongelmans D, de Keizer N Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2022; 66(9):1107-1115.

PMID: 36031794 PMC: 9539143. DOI: 10.1111/aas.14129.


References
1.
Harrison D, Brady A, Rowan K . Case mix, outcome and length of stay for admissions to adult, general critical care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre Case Mix Programme Database. Crit Care. 2004; 8(2):R99-111. PMC: 420043. DOI: 10.1186/cc2834. View

2.
DAgostino Jr R . Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998; 17(19):2265-81. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::aid-sim918>3.0.co;2-b. View

3.
Flabouris A, Hart G, George C . Observational study of patients admitted to intensive care units in Australia and New Zealand after interhospital transfer. Crit Care Resusc. 2008; 10(2):90-6. View

4.
Austin P, Grootendorst P, Anderson G . A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study. Stat Med. 2006; 26(4):734-53. DOI: 10.1002/sim.2580. View

5.
Knaus W, Draper E, Wagner D, Zimmerman J . APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med. 1985; 13(10):818-29. View