Prioritizing the organization and management of intensive care services in the United States

The PrOMIS Conference

Amber E. Barnato, Jeremy M. Kahn, Gordon D. Rubenfeld, Kathleen McCauley, Dorrie Fontaine, Joseph J. Frassica, Rolf Hubmayr, Judith Jacobi, Roy G Brower, Donald Chalfin, William Sibbald, David A. Asch, Mark Kelley, Derek C. Angus

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Adult critical care services are a large, expensive part of U.S. health care. The current agenda for response to workforce shortages and rising costs has largely been determined by members of the critical care profession without input from other stakeholders. We sought to elicit the perceived problems and solutions to the delivery of critical care services from a broad set of U.S. stakeholders. DESIGN: A consensus process involving purposive sampling of identified stakeholders, preconference Web-based survey, and 2-day conference. SETTING: Participants represented healthcare providers, accreditation and quality-oversight groups, federal sponsoring institutions, healthcare vendors, and institutional and individual payers. SUBJECTS: We identified 39 stakeholders for the field of critical care medicine. Thirty-six (92%) completed the preconference survey and 37 (95%) attended the conference. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Participants expressed moderate to strong agreement with the concerns identified by the critical care professionals and additionally expressed consternation that the critical care delivery system was fragmented, variable, and not patient-centered. Recommended solutions included regionalizing the adult critical care system into "tiers" defined by explicit triage criteria and professional competencies, achieved through voluntary hospital accreditation, supported through an expanded process of competency certification, and monitored through process and outcome surveillance; implementing mechanisms for improved communication across providers and settings and between providers and patients/families; and conducting market research and a public education campaign regarding critical care's promises and limitations. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus conference confirms that agreement on solutions to complex healthcare delivery problems can be achieved and that problem and solution frames expand with broader stakeholder participation. This process can be used as a model by other specialties to address priority setting in an era of shifting demographics and increasing resource constraints.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalCritical Care Medicine
Volume35
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2007

Fingerprint

Critical Care
Organizations
Accreditation
Delivery of Health Care
Consensus
Voluntary Hospitals
Triage
Certification
Marketing
Health Personnel
Communication
Medicine
Demography
Education
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • Critical care
  • Health priorities
  • Intensive care units
  • Organization
  • Organization and administration

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Barnato, A. E., Kahn, J. M., Rubenfeld, G. D., McCauley, K., Fontaine, D., Frassica, J. J., ... Angus, D. C. (2007). Prioritizing the organization and management of intensive care services in the United States: The PrOMIS Conference. Critical Care Medicine, 35(4). https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000259535.06205.B4

Prioritizing the organization and management of intensive care services in the United States : The PrOMIS Conference. / Barnato, Amber E.; Kahn, Jeremy M.; Rubenfeld, Gordon D.; McCauley, Kathleen; Fontaine, Dorrie; Frassica, Joseph J.; Hubmayr, Rolf; Jacobi, Judith; Brower, Roy G; Chalfin, Donald; Sibbald, William; Asch, David A.; Kelley, Mark; Angus, Derek C.

In: Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 35, No. 4, 04.2007.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Barnato, AE, Kahn, JM, Rubenfeld, GD, McCauley, K, Fontaine, D, Frassica, JJ, Hubmayr, R, Jacobi, J, Brower, RG, Chalfin, D, Sibbald, W, Asch, DA, Kelley, M & Angus, DC 2007, 'Prioritizing the organization and management of intensive care services in the United States: The PrOMIS Conference', Critical Care Medicine, vol. 35, no. 4. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000259535.06205.B4
Barnato, Amber E. ; Kahn, Jeremy M. ; Rubenfeld, Gordon D. ; McCauley, Kathleen ; Fontaine, Dorrie ; Frassica, Joseph J. ; Hubmayr, Rolf ; Jacobi, Judith ; Brower, Roy G ; Chalfin, Donald ; Sibbald, William ; Asch, David A. ; Kelley, Mark ; Angus, Derek C. / Prioritizing the organization and management of intensive care services in the United States : The PrOMIS Conference. In: Critical Care Medicine. 2007 ; Vol. 35, No. 4.
@article{b17b0387b65c4c1e881ce5c5f3513711,
title = "Prioritizing the organization and management of intensive care services in the United States: The PrOMIS Conference",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Adult critical care services are a large, expensive part of U.S. health care. The current agenda for response to workforce shortages and rising costs has largely been determined by members of the critical care profession without input from other stakeholders. We sought to elicit the perceived problems and solutions to the delivery of critical care services from a broad set of U.S. stakeholders. DESIGN: A consensus process involving purposive sampling of identified stakeholders, preconference Web-based survey, and 2-day conference. SETTING: Participants represented healthcare providers, accreditation and quality-oversight groups, federal sponsoring institutions, healthcare vendors, and institutional and individual payers. SUBJECTS: We identified 39 stakeholders for the field of critical care medicine. Thirty-six (92{\%}) completed the preconference survey and 37 (95{\%}) attended the conference. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Participants expressed moderate to strong agreement with the concerns identified by the critical care professionals and additionally expressed consternation that the critical care delivery system was fragmented, variable, and not patient-centered. Recommended solutions included regionalizing the adult critical care system into {"}tiers{"} defined by explicit triage criteria and professional competencies, achieved through voluntary hospital accreditation, supported through an expanded process of competency certification, and monitored through process and outcome surveillance; implementing mechanisms for improved communication across providers and settings and between providers and patients/families; and conducting market research and a public education campaign regarding critical care's promises and limitations. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus conference confirms that agreement on solutions to complex healthcare delivery problems can be achieved and that problem and solution frames expand with broader stakeholder participation. This process can be used as a model by other specialties to address priority setting in an era of shifting demographics and increasing resource constraints.",
keywords = "Critical care, Health priorities, Intensive care units, Organization, Organization and administration",
author = "Barnato, {Amber E.} and Kahn, {Jeremy M.} and Rubenfeld, {Gordon D.} and Kathleen McCauley and Dorrie Fontaine and Frassica, {Joseph J.} and Rolf Hubmayr and Judith Jacobi and Brower, {Roy G} and Donald Chalfin and William Sibbald and Asch, {David A.} and Mark Kelley and Angus, {Derek C.}",
year = "2007",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1097/01.CCM.0000259535.06205.B4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prioritizing the organization and management of intensive care services in the United States

T2 - The PrOMIS Conference

AU - Barnato, Amber E.

AU - Kahn, Jeremy M.

AU - Rubenfeld, Gordon D.

AU - McCauley, Kathleen

AU - Fontaine, Dorrie

AU - Frassica, Joseph J.

AU - Hubmayr, Rolf

AU - Jacobi, Judith

AU - Brower, Roy G

AU - Chalfin, Donald

AU - Sibbald, William

AU - Asch, David A.

AU - Kelley, Mark

AU - Angus, Derek C.

PY - 2007/4

Y1 - 2007/4

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Adult critical care services are a large, expensive part of U.S. health care. The current agenda for response to workforce shortages and rising costs has largely been determined by members of the critical care profession without input from other stakeholders. We sought to elicit the perceived problems and solutions to the delivery of critical care services from a broad set of U.S. stakeholders. DESIGN: A consensus process involving purposive sampling of identified stakeholders, preconference Web-based survey, and 2-day conference. SETTING: Participants represented healthcare providers, accreditation and quality-oversight groups, federal sponsoring institutions, healthcare vendors, and institutional and individual payers. SUBJECTS: We identified 39 stakeholders for the field of critical care medicine. Thirty-six (92%) completed the preconference survey and 37 (95%) attended the conference. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Participants expressed moderate to strong agreement with the concerns identified by the critical care professionals and additionally expressed consternation that the critical care delivery system was fragmented, variable, and not patient-centered. Recommended solutions included regionalizing the adult critical care system into "tiers" defined by explicit triage criteria and professional competencies, achieved through voluntary hospital accreditation, supported through an expanded process of competency certification, and monitored through process and outcome surveillance; implementing mechanisms for improved communication across providers and settings and between providers and patients/families; and conducting market research and a public education campaign regarding critical care's promises and limitations. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus conference confirms that agreement on solutions to complex healthcare delivery problems can be achieved and that problem and solution frames expand with broader stakeholder participation. This process can be used as a model by other specialties to address priority setting in an era of shifting demographics and increasing resource constraints.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Adult critical care services are a large, expensive part of U.S. health care. The current agenda for response to workforce shortages and rising costs has largely been determined by members of the critical care profession without input from other stakeholders. We sought to elicit the perceived problems and solutions to the delivery of critical care services from a broad set of U.S. stakeholders. DESIGN: A consensus process involving purposive sampling of identified stakeholders, preconference Web-based survey, and 2-day conference. SETTING: Participants represented healthcare providers, accreditation and quality-oversight groups, federal sponsoring institutions, healthcare vendors, and institutional and individual payers. SUBJECTS: We identified 39 stakeholders for the field of critical care medicine. Thirty-six (92%) completed the preconference survey and 37 (95%) attended the conference. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Participants expressed moderate to strong agreement with the concerns identified by the critical care professionals and additionally expressed consternation that the critical care delivery system was fragmented, variable, and not patient-centered. Recommended solutions included regionalizing the adult critical care system into "tiers" defined by explicit triage criteria and professional competencies, achieved through voluntary hospital accreditation, supported through an expanded process of competency certification, and monitored through process and outcome surveillance; implementing mechanisms for improved communication across providers and settings and between providers and patients/families; and conducting market research and a public education campaign regarding critical care's promises and limitations. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus conference confirms that agreement on solutions to complex healthcare delivery problems can be achieved and that problem and solution frames expand with broader stakeholder participation. This process can be used as a model by other specialties to address priority setting in an era of shifting demographics and increasing resource constraints.

KW - Critical care

KW - Health priorities

KW - Intensive care units

KW - Organization

KW - Organization and administration

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34247129203&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34247129203&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.CCM.0000259535.06205.B4

DO - 10.1097/01.CCM.0000259535.06205.B4

M3 - Article

VL - 35

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

IS - 4

ER -