↓ Skip to main content

Nighttime intensivist staffing and the timing of death among ICU decedents: a retrospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nighttime intensivist staffing and the timing of death among ICU decedents: a retrospective cohort study
Published in
Critical Care, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc13033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lora A Reineck, David J Wallace, Amber E Barnato, Jeremy M Kahn

Abstract

Intensive care units (ICUs) are increasingly adopting 24-hour intensivist physician staffing. Although nighttime intensivist staffing does not consistently reduce mortality, it may affect other outcomes such as the quality of end-of-life care. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ICU decedents using the 2009-2010 Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation clinical information system linked to a survey of ICU staffing practices. We restricted the analysis to ICUs with high-intensity daytime staffing, in which the addition of nighttime staffing does not influence mortality. We used multivariable regression to assess the relationship between nighttime intensivist staffing and two separate outcomes potentially related to the quality of end-of-life care: time from ICU admission to death and death at night. Of 30,456 patients admitted to 27 high-intensity daytime staffed ICUs, 3,553 died in the hospital within 30 days. After adjustment for potential confounders, admission to an ICU with nighttime intensivist staffing was associated with a shorter duration between ICU admission and death (adjusted difference: -2.5 days, 95% CI -3.5 to -1.5, p-value < 0.001) and a decreased odds of nighttime death (adjusted odds ratio: 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.94, p-value 0.011) compared to admission to an ICU without nighttime intensivist staffing. Among ICU decedents, nighttime intensivist staffing is associated with reduced time between ICU admission and death and reduced odds of nighttime death.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 49 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Other 6 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 14 27%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 62%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 7 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,397
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,165
of 220,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#52
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 220,241 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.