SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.35 issue2Microbiological profile of infections in the Intensive Care Units of Colombia (EPISEPSIS Colombia) author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Medicina Intensiva

Print version ISSN 0210-5691

Abstract

MORENO-MILLAN, E.; GARCIA-TORRECILLAS, J.M.; VILLEGAS-DEL OJO, J.  and  PRIETO-VALDERREY, F.. Is the permanent pacemaker implant more efficient in level 1 hospital?. Med. Intensiva [online]. 2011, vol.35, n.2, pp.68-74. ISSN 0210-5691.

Objective: To determine if permanent pacemaker implants (PPM) interventions and change of generator are more efficient in small hospitals. Design: A cost-effective analysis and retrospective, cross-sectional and observational study of diagnostic related groups (DRG). Setting: The data was obtained from the national Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS) for the year 2007 provided by the Health Ministry. Patients: This includes the total number of patients who required treatment in all national hospitals for 5 DRG: 115 - bradyarrhythmic complication during the acute coronary syndrome, heart failure or shock; 116 -symptomatic isolated conduction defects; 117 -revisions, but without changing the battery, 118- application of a new one, 549 - implementation or revision but with serious complications. Principal variables of interest: demographic, clinical (number of secondary diagnoses (NSD) and procedures (NP), mortality) and management (total and preoperative length of stay (LOS), access, discharge, hospital size), defining inefficient stays as those exceeding 2 days on the average. Results: 23,154 episodes, 5.3% small hospitals. The comparative bivariate study between small hospitals and the rest, not discriminated by DRG, showed a mean LOS of 7.87±8.78 days vs 11.01±12.95 (p=0.005, 95% CI for mean difference [0.17, 1.65]) and also lower than preoperatively (3.62±6.14 vs. 4.22±6.68 days (p=0.015)) without greater comorbidity, as measured by proxy through the NSD (5.23±2.88 vs 5.42±3.28 (p=0.055)) and NP as proxy of diagnostic and therapeutic effort (3.79±2.50 vs 3.55±2.69 (p=0.002)). A total of 24.1% were inefficient, there being an association with preoperative stay, NDS, NP and emergency access. Conclusion: Pacemaker implantation and generator change in small hospitals is more efficient, with internal consistency by subgroups.

Keywords : Pacemaker; Management; Efficiency.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License