Key result
Among 69 ICU patients, 59% experienced discharge delay and 20% experienced after-hours discharge, with significant differences in wait times across three hospital sites.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to compare contextual factors influencing patient discharge practices across three intensive care units.
Observational (n=69)
Yes
Discharge delays and after-hours discharges are common in the ICU, with significant variation across hospitals highlighting the need for context-specific interventions.
Discharge delays and after-hours events vary by ICU context; leaves open whether context-specific strategies improve processes.
AIMS: To compare contextual factors influencing discharge practices in three intensive care units (ICUs). DESIGN: A prospective observational study. METHODS: Data were collected using a discharge process report form (DPRF) between May and September 2023. Descriptive statistics were performed to analyse demographic and clinical data. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the time interval differences among the three sites. RESULTS: Overall, 69 patients' discharge processes were observed. Among them, 41 (59%) experienced discharge delay, and 1 in 5 patients experienced after-hours discharge. There were statistically significant differences in mean hours in various time intervals during the discharge processes among the three sites. Patients in Hospital C waited the longest time (mean = 31.9 h) for the ward bed to be ready after the bed was requested and for being eventually discharged after ICU nurses to get them ready for discharge (mean = 26.7 h) compared to Hospital A and Hospital B. CONCLUSIONS: We found that discharge delay and after-hours discharge were common and there were significant differences in mean hours of various time intervals during the discharge processes occurred among the three sites. The influence of contextual factors in different hospitals/ICU needs to be considered to improve the ICU discharge process. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Researchers and clinicians should consider targeted context-specific interventions and strategies to optimise patient discharge process from ICUs. IMPACT: The study findings will inform the development of tailored interventions to reduce the discharge delay and after-hours discharge and, in turn, improve the quality and safety of patient care and health service efficiency. REPORTING METHOD: The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients' discharge processes were observed, and consumer representatives were involved in the study design.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Intensive care patients awaiting discharge (n=69). Hospital site (Hospital A, B, C) was evaluated on Time interval differences during the discharge process among the three sites. Among 69 ICU patients, 59% experienced discharge delay and 20% experienced after-hours discharge, with significant differences in wait times across three hospital sites.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: