Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Users Online: 353

 

Home  | About Us | Editors | Search | Ahead Of Print | Current Issue | Archives | Submit Article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Login 
     
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 9-13

Use of intensive care unit priority model in directing intensive care unit admission in Sudan: A prospective cross-sectional study


1 Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Khartoum; Department of Critical Care, Soba University Hospital, Khartoum, Sudan
2 College of Medicine, Ajman University, United Arab Emirates; Faculty of Medicine, University of Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan
3 Faculty of Medicine, Omdurman Islamic University, Khartoum, Sudan

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Shaima N Elgenaid
College of Medicine, Ajman University

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/IJCIIS.IJCIIS_8_20

Rights and Permissions

Background: The shortage of specialized intensive care beds is one of the principal factors that limit intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. This study explores the utilization of priority criteria in directing ICU admission and predicting outcomes. Methods: This was a prospective cross-sectional study conducted in two ICUs in Sudan from April to December 2018. Patients were assessed for ICU admission and were ranked by priority into Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 (1 highest priority and 4 lowest priority), and these groups were compared using independent t-test, Chi-square, and ANOVA. Results: A total of 180 ICU admitted patients were enrolled, 53% were male. The prioritization categories showed that 86 (47.8%), 50 (27.8%), 13 (7.2%), and 31 (17.2%) were categorized as priority 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Patients in priority groups 3 and 4had significantly higher ICU mortality rates compared to those in groups 1 and 2 (P < 0.001), were likely to be older (P < 0.001), had significantly more comorbidities (P = 0.001), were more likely to be dependent (P < 0.001), and had longer ICU length of stay (P = 0.028). Conclusion: Patients classified as priority 3 and 4 were predominantly older and had many comorbidities. They were likely to be dependent, stay longer in ICU, and exhibit mortality.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed402    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded8    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal