Primary nosocomial bloodstream infection (BSI) is a common occurrence in the intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with a crude mortality of 31.5 to 82.4%. However, an accurate estimate of the attributable mortality has been limited because of confounding by severity of illness. We undertook this study to assess the attributable mortality and costs associated with an episode of BSI. Infected patients were defined as those who had an episode of BSI during the study period. Uninfected control subjects were matched to the infected patients based upon a number of factors, including predicted mortality on the day prior to infection. The main outcome measures were crude ICU mortality, length of stay, and costs. We found no difference in the crude mortality for the infected and the uninfected patients (35.3 and 30.9%, respectively, p = 0.51). However, among survivors, the patients with nosocomial bloodstream infections did have excess length of stay (mean, 10 d; median, 5 d; p = 0.007) and increased direct costs (mean difference, $34,508; p = 0.008). After matching for severity of illness, we could not detect an association between primary nosocomial bloodstream infections and increased ICU mortality. We did find that primary nosocomial bloodstream infections increased ICU length of stay and costs.

Patients readmitted to medical ICUs have significantly higher hospital lengths of stay and mortality. ICU readmissions may be more common among patients who respond poorly to treatment as measured by increased severity of illness at first ICU discharge and failure of prior therapy at another hospital or on a general medicine unit. Tertiary care ICUs may have higher than expected readmission rates and mortalities, even when accounting for severity of illness, if they care for significant numbers of transferred patients.

Rationale: Checklists may reduce errors of omission for critically ill patients. Objectives: To determine whether prompting to use a checklist improves process of care and clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a cohort study in the medical intensive care unit (MICU) of a tertiary care university hospital. Patients admitted to either of two independent MICU teams were included. Intervention team physicians were prompted to address six parameters from a daily rounding checklist if overlooked during morning work rounds. The second team (control) used the identical checklist without prompting. Measurements and Main Results: One hundred and forty prompted group patients were compared with 125 control and 1,283 preintervention patients. Compared with control, prompting increased median ventilator-free duration, decreased empirical antibiotic and central venous catheter duration, and increased rates of deep vein thrombosis and stress ulcer prophylaxis. Prompted group patients had lower risk-adjusted ICU mortality compared with the control group (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.96; P ¼ 0.041) and lower hospital mortality compared with the control group (10.0 vs. 20.8%; P ¼ 0.014), which remained significant after risk adjustment (odds ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.76; P ¼ 0.008). Observed-to-predicted ICU length of stay was lower in the prompted group compared with control (0.59 vs. 0.87; P ¼ 0.02). Checklist availability alone did not improve mortality or length of stay compared with preintervention patients. Conclusions: In this single-site, preliminary study, checklist-based prompting improved multiple processes of care, and may have improved mortality and length of stay, compared with a stand-alone checklist. The manner in which checklists are implemented is of great consequence in the care of critically ill patients.