0
Poster Presentations: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 |

Pediatric Code Events: Does In-House Intensivist Supervision Improve Outcomes? FREE TO VIEW

Christopher Carroll, MD; Kathleen Sala, MPH; Aaron Zucker, MD; Fisher Daniel, MD; Robert Englander, MD
Chest. 2011;140(4_MeetingAbstracts):392A. doi:10.1378/chest.1114250
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Abstract

PURPOSE: A change in our children’s hospital coverage model to providing full-time in-house supervision by intensivists allowed us to evaluate the impact of this change on patient safety outcomes. Our aim was to determine whether in-house attending coverage influenced the incidence and outcomes of pediatric code events.

METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all code events between October 2005 - October 2007 (pre in-house intensivist supervision) and compared the incidence, interventions, and outcomes of these codes to those occurring between April 2008 - April 2010 (post in-house intensivist supervision). A code event was defined as any activation of the code system.

RESULTS: On the ward, pre in-house intensivist supervision, there were 0.20 codes/1000 patient-days. Post in-house intensivist supervision, there was a significant increase in the rate of codes (0.71 codes/1000 patient-days; p=0.013) and an intensivist was significantly more likely to be present during these events (OR 28; 95% CI 3-273; p=0.001). Additionally, post in-house intensivist supervision, there were no differences in the illness severity scores of the patients involved, but there were significantly lower incidences of CPR, intubation, and atropine use for bradycardia, as well as a lower incidence of staff concerns about patient care on post-code review. In the codes occurring in the ICU, there were no significant differences in the rates of codes between the two periods (3.8 codes/1000 patient-days vs. 3.4 codes/1000 patient-days; p=0.73), but an intensivist was more likely to be present in the period post in-house intensivist supervision. There were no significant differences in patient illness severity, types and incidence of interventions, or in staff concerns on post-code review between the periods.

CONCLUSIONS: In the period following implementation of in-house intensivist supervision, there was a higher rate of codes, however, despite similar illness severity scores of the patients involved, these codes were associated with less interventions and less staff concerns about patient care on post-code review.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In-house intensivist coverage may prevent deterioration during codes that result in the need for interventions, thereby potentially improving outcomes.

DISCLOSURE: The following authors have nothing to disclose: Christopher Carroll, Kathleen Sala, Aaron Zucker, Fisher Daniel, Robert Englander

No Product/Research Disclosure Information

09:00 AM - 10:00 AM


Figures

Tables

References

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
Parameters of care for craniosynostosis. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2012;49 Suppl():1S-24S.
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543