AI Article Synopsis

  • Nurse practitioner-led Medical Emergency Team (MET) calls are associated with better clinical outcomes compared to those led by ICU registrars, but their cost effectiveness is less understood.
  • A retrospective study analyzed the costs of MET calls over nearly two years, revealing that nurse practitioner-led calls were cheaper, with lower average costs per call than ICU registrar-led calls.
  • A healthcare service performing over 101 MET calls that lead to ICU admissions annually could benefit financially by implementing a 24-hour nurse practitioner-led MET call system.

Article Abstract

Objectives: Nurse practitioner-led MET calls have been shown to improve clinical outcomes versus ICU registrar-led MET calls. However, the cost implications of a nurse practitioner-led MET call system is not known. We conducted cost analysis from the healthcare service perspective to compare the costs of nurse practitioner- and ICU registrar-led MET calls.

Research Methodology: A retrospective study of MET calls between 1 June 2016 and 9 March 2018 including patients with first MET call during their hospital admission. The cost analysis compared MET calls attended by nurse practitioners against those attended by ICU registrars.

Main Outcome Measures: Inpatient costs for nurse practitioner- and ICU registrar-led MET calls.

Results: 1,343 MET calls were included in the full dataset with a mean cost per ICU registrar-led MET calls and nurse practitioner led MET calls of AU$19,836 (95 % CI: AU$15,778 - AU$23,895) versus AU$16,404 (95 % CI: AU$14,988 - AU$17,820) respectively and a difference of AU$3,432 (95 % CI: -AU$38 - AU$6,903, p = 0.053). In the propensity-score matched analysis, the mean cost per ICU registrar-led MET calls and nurse practitioner led MET calls was AU$19,009 (95 % CI: AU$15,439 - AU$22,578) and AU$13,937 (95 % CI: AU$12,038 - AU$15,835) respectively, with a difference of AU$5,072 (95 % CI: AU$1,061 - AU$9,082, p = 0.013). A 24-hour nurse practitioners-led MET call service would break even at 101 MET calls leading to ICU admissions per year.

Conclusion: Nurse practitioners-led MET calls saved significant costs compared to ICU registrar-led MET calls. Assuming that the difference in costs is due to shorter ICU length of stay, a health service that receives more than 101 MET calls leading to ICU admissions per year can save costs with a 24-hour nurse practitioner-led MET call service.

Implications For Clinical Practice: This study helps in identifying the healthcare services where nurse practitioners -led MET systems could be implemented to be cost saving from health service perspective.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2024.103819DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

met calls
52
icu registrar-led
24
registrar-led met
24
met
20
met call
16
calls
14
cost analysis
12
nurse
12
nurse practitioners
12
nurse practitioner-led
12

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!