Critical care bed capacity in Asian countries and regions

Objective: To assess the number of adult critical care beds in Asian countries and regions in relation to population size. Design: Cross-sectional observational study. Setting: Twenty-three Asian countries and regions, covering 92.1% of the continent’s population. Participants: Ten low-income and lower-middle–income economies, five upper-middle–income economies, and eight high-income economies according to the World Bank classification. Interventions: Data closest to 2017 on critical care beds, including ICU and intermediate care unit beds, were obtained through multiple means, including government sources, national critical care societies, colleges, or registries, personal contacts, and extrapolation of data. Measurements and Main Results: Cumulatively, there were 3.6 critical care beds per 100,000 population. The median number of critical care beds per 100,000 population per country and region was significantly lower in low- and lower-middle–income economies (2.3; interquartile range, 1.4–2.7) than in upper-middle–income economies (4.6; interquartile range, 3.5–15.9) and high-income economies (12.3; interquartile range, 8.1–20.8) (p = 0.001), with a large variation even across countries and regions of the same World Bank income classification. This number was independently predicted by the World Bank income classification on multivariable analysis, and significantly correlated with the number of acute hospital beds per 100,000 population (r2 = 0.19; p = 0.047), the universal health coverage service coverage index (r2 = 0.35; p = 0.003), and the Human Development Index (r2 = 0.40; p = 0.001) on univariable analysis. Conclusions: Critical care bed capacity varies widely across Asia and is significantly lower in low- and lower-middle–income than in upper-middle–income and high-income countries and regions

Prognostic evaluation of quick sequential organ failure assessment score in ICU patients with sepsis across different income settings

Background There is conflicting evidence on association between quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and sepsis mortality in ICU patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the association between qSOFA and 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. Association of qSOFA with early (3-day), medium (28-day), late (90-day) mortality was assessed in low and lower middle income (LLMIC), upper middle income (UMIC) and high income (HIC) countries/regions. Methods This was a secondary analysis of the MOSAICS II study, an international prospective observational study on sepsis epidemiology in Asian ICUs. Associations between qSOFA at ICU admission and mortality were separately assessed in LLMIC, UMIC and HIC countries/regions. Modified Poisson regression was used to determine the adjusted relative risk (RR) of qSOFA score on mortality at 28 days with adjustments for confounders identified in the MOSAICS II study. Results Among the MOSAICS II study cohort of 4980 patients, 4826 patients from 343 ICUs and 22 countries were included in this secondary analysis. Higher qSOFA was associated with increasing 28-day mortality, but this was only observed in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) and not HIC (p = 0.220) countries/regions. Similarly, higher 90-day mortality was associated with increased qSOFA in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) only. In contrast, higher 3-day mortality with increasing qSOFA score was observed across all income countries/regions (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that qSOFA remained associated with 28-day mortality (adjusted RR 1.09 (1.00–1.18), p = 0.038) even after adjustments for covariates including APACHE II, SOFA, income country/region and administration of antibiotics within 3 h. Conclusions qSOFA was independently associated with 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. In LLMIC and UMIC countries/regions, qSOFA was associated with early to late mortality but only early mortality in HIC countries/regions

Critical care bed capacity in Asian countries and regions

Objective: To assess the number of adult critical care beds in Asian countries and regions in relation to population size.Design: Cross-sectional observational study.Setting: Twenty-three Asian countries and regions, covering 92.1% of the continent\u27s population.Participants: Ten low-income and lower-middle-income economies, five upper-middle-income economies, and eight high-income economies according to the World Bank classification.Interventions: Data closest to 2017 on critical care beds, including ICU and intermediate care unit beds, were obtained through multiple means, including government sources, national critical care societies, colleges, or registries, personal contacts, and extrapolation of data.Measurements and main results: Cumulatively, there were 3.6 critical care beds per 100,000 population. The median number of critical care beds per 100,000 population per country and region was significantly lower in low- and lower-middle-income economies (2.3; interquartile range, 1.4-2.7) than in upper-middle-income economies (4.6; interquartile range, 3.5-15.9) and high-income economies (12.3; interquartile range, 8.1-20.8) (p = 0.001), with a large variation even across countries and regions of the same World Bank income classification. This number was independently predicted by the World Bank income classification on multivariable analysis, and significantly correlated with the number of acute hospital beds per 100,000 population (r = 0.19; p = 0.047), the universal health coverage service coverage index (r = 0.35; p = 0.003), and the Human Development Index (r = 0.40; p = 0.001) on univariable analysis.Conclusions: Critical care bed capacity varies widely across Asia and is significantly lower in low- and lower-middle-income than in upper-middle-income and high-income countries and regions

Establishing a critical care network in Asia to improve care for critically ill patients in low- and middle-income countries

When undertaking quality improvement (QI) initiatives, one of the greatest burdens is repeated data collection. Intensive care registries, such as those commonly used in high-income countries (HICs), have enabled systematic capture of routine information needed to measure intensive care unit (ICU) performance. Once considered unfeasible in resource-limited settings, newer cloud-based platforms are gaining increasing traction. Collaborative surveillance platforms, such as NICS-MORU and PRICE, which have mobile and desktop applications, have established methods for daily capture of individual patient-level information and have shown that—even in resource-limited settings—the systematic evaluation of patient care throughout the hospital journey is feasible at scale using coalesced minimal data sets

Additional file 1 of Prognostic evaluation of quick sequential organ failure assessment score in ICU patients with sepsis across different income settings

Additional file 1. Supplementary Figures 1–6