• Critical care medicine · Jan 2023

    Meta Analysis

    Safety Outcomes of Direct Discharge Home From ICUs: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (Direct From ICU Sent Home Study).

    • Vincent I Lau, Ryan Donnelly, Sehar Parvez, Jivanjot Gill, Sean M Bagshaw, Ian M Ball, John Basmaji, Deborah J Cook, Kirsten M Fiest, Robert A Fowler, Jonathan F Mailman, Claudio M Martin, Bram Rochwerg, Damon C Scales, Henry T Stelfox, Alla Iansavichene, and Eric J Sy.
    • Department of Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta and Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
    • Crit. Care Med. 2023 Jan 1; 51 (1): 127135127-135.

    ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of direct discharge home (DDH) from ICUs compared with ward transfer on safety outcomes of readmissions, emergency department (ED) visits, and mortality.Data SourcesWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception until March 28, 2022.Study SelectionRandomized and nonrandomized studies of DDH patients compared with ward transfer were eligible.Data ExtractionWe screened and extracted studies independently and in duplicate. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. A random-effects meta-analysis model and heterogeneity assessment was performed using pooled data (inverse variance) for propensity-matched and unadjusted cohorts. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Data SynthesisOf 10,228 citations identified, we included six studies. Of these, three high-quality studies, which enrolled 49,376 patients in propensity-matched cohorts, could be pooled using meta-analysis. For DDH from ICU, compared with ward transfers, there was no difference in the risk of ED visits at 30-day (22.4% vs 22.7%; relative risk [RR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95-1.02; p = 0.39; low certainty); hospital readmissions at 30-day (9.8% vs 9.6%; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.91-1.15; p = 0.71; very low-to-low certainty); or 90-day mortality (2.8% vs 2.6%; RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.95-1.18; p = 0.29; very low-to-low certainty). There were no important differences in the unmatched cohorts or across subgroup analyses.ConclusionsVery low-to-low certainty evidence from observational studies suggests that DDH from ICU may have no difference in safety outcomes compared with ward transfer of selected ICU patients. In the future, this research question could be further examined by randomized control trials to provide higher certainty data.Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…