International comparisons of critical care outcome and resource consumption.
Though there are reasonable data to suggest that certain countries, such as the United States, spend considerably more money on the provision of critical care services than others, there is little information regarding the added benefits accrued with this additional expense. Studies to date have suggested little if no difference in outcome but have been limited in their size, design, and choice of outcome measures. Furthermore, significant underlying societal priorities and philosophy may dictate that the optimal critical care delivery system is different for different countries. With the increasing availability of large patient databases, however, it will be more feasible in the future to design and conduct assessments of critical care delivery systems between countries taking appropriate account of the choice of study design, definition of at-risk populations, and choice of valuable measures of output and cost. The results of such assessments will hopefully drive wiser decision making in the design and management of critical care delivery systems worldwide.
Angus
D C
DC
Health Delivery & Systems Evaluation Team (HeDSET), Department of Anesthesiology, University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Sirio
C A
CA
Clermont
G
G
Bion
J
J
D003422:Critical Care / Q000191:economics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D003625:Data Collection / Q000379:methods; D005060:Europe; D005102:Health Expenditures / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006295:Health Resources / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D007362:Intensive Care Units / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D007564:Japan; D015233:Models, Statistical; D009656:North America; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D012107:Research Design