Back to Search
Start Over
Outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome in university and non-university hospitals in Germany
- Source :
- Critical care 21(1), 122 (2017). doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1687-0, Critical Care, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-17 (2017), Repositorio Institucional de la Consejería de Sanidad de la Comunidad de Madrid, Consejería de Sanidad de la Comunidad de Madrid
- Publication Year :
- 2017
- Publisher :
- BioMed Central, 2017.
-
Abstract
- Background This study investigates differences in treatment and outcome of ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) between university and non-university hospitals in Germany. Methods This subanalysis of a prospective, observational cohort study was performed to identify independent risk factors for mortality by examining: baseline factors, ventilator settings (e.g., driving pressure), complications, and care settings—for example, case volume of ventilated patients, size/type of intensive care unit (ICU), and type of hospital (university/non-university hospital). To control for potentially confounding factors at ARDS onset and to verify differences in mortality, ARDS patients in university vs non-university hospitals were compared using additional multivariable analysis. Results Of the 7540 patients admitted to 95 ICUs from 18 university and 62 non-university hospitals in May 2004, 1028 received mechanical ventilation and 198 developed ARDS. Although the characteristics of ARDS patients were very similar, hospital mortality was considerably lower in university compared with non-university hospitals (39.3% vs 57.5%; p = 0.012). Treatment in non-university hospitals was independently associated with increased mortality (OR (95% CI): 2.89 (1.31–6.38); p = 0.008). This was confirmed by additional independent comparisons between the two patient groups when controlling for confounding factors at ARDS onset. Higher driving pressures (OR 1.10; 1 cmH2O increments) were also independently associated with higher mortality. Compared with non-university hospitals, higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (mean ± SD: 11.7 ± 4.7 vs 9.7 ± 3.7 cmH2O; p = 0.005) and lower driving pressures (15.1 ± 4.4 vs 17.0 ± 5.0 cmH2O; p = 0.02) were applied during therapeutic ventilation in university hospitals, and ventilation lasted twice as long (median (IQR): 16 (9–29) vs 8 (3–16) days; p
- Subjects :
- Male
Acute respiratory distress syndrome
Medizin
Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult
lcsh:Medical emergencies. Critical care. Intensive care. First aid
lcsh:RC86-88.9
Middle Aged
Biphasic positive airway pressure
Respiration, Artificial
Cohort Studies
Hospitals, University
Intensive Care Units
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Logistic Models
Mechanical ventilation
Risk Factors
Germany
Driving pressure
Humans
Female
Hospital Mortality
Prospective Studies
Care setting
Aged
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Critical care 21(1), 122 (2017). doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1687-0, Critical Care, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-17 (2017), Repositorio Institucional de la Consejería de Sanidad de la Comunidad de Madrid, Consejería de Sanidad de la Comunidad de Madrid
- Accession number :
- edsair.dedup.wf.001..af8e2fdaeae6c7eaffbe927026e7eb63
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1687-0