The Coxian phase-type distribution as a contribution to the multilevel model of in-hospital mortality

This paper presents multilevel models that utilize the Coxian phase-type distribution in order to be able to include a survival component in the model. The approach is demonstrated by modeling patient length of stay and in-hospital mortality in geriatric wards in Italy. The multilevel model is used to provide a means of controlling for the existence of possible intra-ward correlations, which may make patients within a hospital more alike in terms of experienced outcome than patients coming from different hospitals, everything else being equal. Within this multilevel model we introduce the use of the Coxian phase-type distribution to create a covariate that represents patient length of stay or stage (of hospital care). Results demonstrate that the use of the multilevel model for representing the in-patient mortality is successful and further enhanced by the inclusion of the Coxian phase-type distribution variable (stage covariate).

Using Coxian Phase-Type Distributions to Identify Patient Characteristics for Duration of Stay in Hospital

Coxian phase-type distributions are a special type of Markov model that describes duration until an event occurs in terms of a process consisting of a sequence of latent phases. This paper considers the use of Coxian phase-type distributions for modelling patient duration of stay for the elderly in hospital and investigates the potential for using the resulting distribution as a classifying variable to identify common characteristics between different groups of patients according to their (anticipated) length of stay in hospital. The identification of common characteristics for patient length of stay groups would offer hospital managers and clinicians possible insights into the overall management and bed allocation of the hospital wards.

Outreach and Early Warning Systems (EWS) for the prevention of intensive care admission and death of critically ill adult patients on general hospital wards

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that outreach and early warning systems (EWS) are an integral part of a hospital wide systems approach to improve the early identification and management of deteriorating patients on general hospital wards, the widespread implementation of these interventions in practice is not based on robust research evidence. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the impact of critical care outreach services on hospital mortality rates. Secondary objectives included determining the effect of outreach services on intensive care unit (ICU) admission patterns, length of hospital stay and adverse events. SEARCH STRATEGY: The review authors searched the following electronic databases: EPOC Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and other Cochrane databases (all on The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1996-June week 3 2006), EMBASE (1974-week 26 2006), CINAHL (1982-July week 5 2006), First Search (1992-2005) and CAB Health (1990-July 2006); also reference lists of relevant articles, conference abstracts, and made contact with experts and critical care organisations for further information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series designs (ITS) which measured hospital mortality, unanticipated ICU admissions, ICU readmissions, length of hospital stay and adverse events following implementation of outreach and EWS in a general hospital ward to identify deteriorating adult patients versus general hospital ward setting without outreach and EWS were included in the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data and two review authors assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity. Summary statistics and descriptive summaries of primary and secondary outcomes are presented for each study. MAIN RESULTS: Two cluster-randomised control trials were included: one randomised at hospital level (23 hospitals in Australia) and one at ward level (16 wards in the UK). The primary outcome in the Australian trial (a composite score comprising incidence of unexpected cardiac arrests, unexpected deaths and unplanned ICU admissions) showed no statistical significant difference between control and medical emergency team (MET) hospitals (adjusted P value 0.640; adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.16). The UK-based trial found that outreach reduced in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.85) compared with the control group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from this review highlights the diversity and poor methodological quality of most studies investigating outreach. The results of the two included studies showed either no evidence of the effectiveness of outreach or a reduction in overall mortality in patients receiving outreach. The lack of evidence on outreach requires further multi-site RCT's to determine potential effectiveness.