Dataset Information

Evaluation of hospital nurse-to-patient staffing ratios and sepsis bundles on patient outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Despite nurses' responsibilities in recognition and treatment of sepsis, little evidence documents whether patient-to-nurse staffing ratios are associated with clinical outcomes for patients with sepsis.

Methods

Using linked data sources from 2017 including MEDPAR patient claims, Hospital Compare, American Hospital Association, and a large survey of nurses, we estimate the effect of hospital patient-to-nurse staffing ratios and adherence to the Early Management Bundle for patients with Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock SEP-1 sepsis bundles on patients' odds of in-hospital and 60-day mortality, readmission, and length of stay. Logistic regression is used to estimate mortality and readmission, while zero-truncated negative binomial models are used for length of stay.

Results

Each additional patient per nurse is associated with 12% higher odds of in-hospital mortality, 7% higher odds of 60-day mortality, 7% higher odds of 60-day readmission, and longer lengths of stay, even after accounting for patient and hospital covariates including hospital adherence to SEP-1 bundles. Adherence to SEP-1 bundles is associated with lower in-hospital mortality and shorter lengths of stay; however, the effects are markedly smaller than those observed for staffing.

Discussion

Improving hospital nurse staffing over and above implementing sepsis bundles holds promise for significant improvements in sepsis patient outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Lasater KB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8190185 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of hospital nurse-to-patient staffing ratios and sepsis bundles on patient outcomes.

Lasater Karen B KB Sloane Douglas M DM McHugh Matthew D MD Cimiotti Jeannie P JP Riman Kathryn A KA Martin Brendan B Alexander Maryann M Aiken Linda H LH

American journal of infection control 20201210 7

<h4>Background</h4>Despite nurses' responsibilities in recognition and treatment of sepsis, little evidence documents whether patient-to-nurse staffing ratios are associated with clinical outcomes for patients with sepsis.<h4>Methods</h4>Using linked data sources from 2017 including MEDPAR patient claims, Hospital Compare, American Hospital Association, and a large survey of nurses, we estimate the effect of hospital patient-to-nurse staffing ratios and adherence to the Early Management Bundle f ...[more]

PMID: 33309843

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesSepsis is a serious inflammatory response to infection with a high death rate. Timely and effective treatment may improve sepsis outcomes resulting in mandatory sepsis care protocol adherence reporting. How the impact of patient-to-nurse staffing compares to sepsis protocol compliance and patient outcomes is not well understood. This study aimed to determine the association between hospital sepsis protocol compliance, patient-to-nurse staffing ratios and patient outcomes.DesignA cross-sectional study examining hospital nurse staffing, sepsis protocol compliance and sepsis patient outcomes, using linked data from nurse (2015-2016, 2020) and hospital (2017) surveys, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare (2017) and corresponding MedPAR patient claims.Setting537 hospitals across six US states (California, Florida, Pennsylvania, New York, Illinois and New Jersey).Participants252 699 Medicare inpatients with sepsis present on admission.MeasuresThe explanatory variables are nurse staffing and SEP-1 compliance. Outcomes are mortality (within 30 and 60 days of index admission), readmissions (within 7, 30, and 60 days of discharge), admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and lengths of stay (LOS).ResultsSepsis protocol compliance and nurse staffing vary widely across hospitals. Each additional patient per nurse was associated with increased odds of 30-day and 60-day mortality (9% (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.13) and 10% (1.10, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.14)), 7-day, 30-day and 60-day readmission (8% (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.11, p<0.001), 7% (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.10, p<0.001), 7% (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.10, p<0.001)), ICU admission (12% (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.22, p=0.007)) and increased relative risk of longer LOS (10% (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.12, p<0.001)). Each 10% increase in sepsis protocol compliance was associated with shorter LOS (2% ([OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97 to 0.99, p<0.001)) only.ConclusionsOutcomes are more strongly associated with improved nurse staffing than with increased compliance with sepsis protocols.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess whether Massachusetts legislation directed at ICU nurse staffing was associated with improvements in patient outcomes.DesignRetrospective cohort study; difference-in-difference design to compare outcomes in Massachusetts with outcomes of other states (before and after the March 31, 2016, compliance deadline).SettingAdministrative claims data collected from medical centers across the United States (Vizient).PatientsAdults between 18 and 99 years old who were admitted to ICUs for greater than or equal to 1 day.InterventionsMassachusetts General Law c. 111, § 231, which established 1) maximum patient-to-nurse assignments of 2:1 in the ICU and 2) that this determination should be based on a patient acuity tool and by the staff nurses in the unit.Measurements and main resultsNurse staffing increased similarly in Massachusetts (n = 11 ICUs, Baseline patient-to-nurse ratio 1.38 ± 0.16 to Post-mandate 1.28 ± 0.15; p = 0.006) and other states (n = 88 ICUs, Baseline 1.35 ± 0.19 to Post-mandate 1.31 ± 0.17; p = 0.002; difference-in-difference p = 0.20). Massachusetts ICU nurse staffing regulations were not associated with changes in hospital mortality within Massachusetts (Baseline n = 29,754, standardized mortality ratio 1.20 ± 0.04 to Post-mandate n = 30,058, 1.15 ± 0.04; p = 0.11) or when compared with changes in hospital mortality in other states (Baseline n = 572,952, 1.15 ± 0.01 to Post-mandate n = 567,608, 1.09 ± 0.01; difference-in-difference p = 0.69). Complications (Massachusetts: Baseline 0.68% to Post-mandate 0.67%; other states: Baseline 0.72% to Post-mandate 0.72%; difference-in-difference p = 0.92) and do-not-resuscitate orders (Massachusetts: Baseline 13.5% to Post-mandate 15.4%; other states: Baseline 12.3% to Post-mandate 14.5%; difference-in-difference p = 0.07) also remained unchanged relative to secular trends. Results were similar in interrupted time series analysis, as well as in subgroups of community hospitals and workload intensive patients receiving mechanical ventilation.ConclusionsState regulation of patient-to-nurse staffing with the aid of patient complexity scores in intensive care was not associated with either increased nurse staffing or changes in patient outcomes.

Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to addresses the basic question of whether alternative legislative approaches are effective in encouraging hospitals to increase nurse staffing.MethodsUsing 16 years of nationally representative hospital-level data from the American Hospital Association (AHA) annual survey, we employed a difference-in-difference design to compare changes in productive hours per patient day for registered nurses (RNs), licensed practical/vocational nurses (LPNs), and nursing assistive personnel (NAP) in the state that mandated staffing ratios, states that legislated staffing committees, and states that legislated public reporting, to changes in states that did not implement any nurse staffing legislation before and after the legislation was implemented. We constructed multivariate linear regression models to assess the effects with hospital and year fixed effects, controlling for hospital-level characteristics and state-level factors.ResultsCompared with states with no legislation, the state that legislated minimum staffing ratios had an 0.996 (P<0.01) increase in RN hours per patient day and 0.224 (P<0.01) increase in NAP hours after the legislation was implemented, but no statistically significant changes in RN or NAP hours were found in states that legislated a staffing committee or public reporting. The staffing committee approach had a negative effect on LPN hours (difference-in-difference=-0.076, P<0.01), while the public reporting approach had a positive effect on LPN hours (difference-in-difference=0.115, P<0.01). There was no statistically significant effect of staffing mandate on LPN hours.ConclusionsWhen we included California in the comparison, our model suggests that neither the staffing committee nor the public reporting approach alone are effective in increasing hospital RN staffing, although the public reporting approach appeared to have a positive effect on LPN staffing. When we excluded California form the model, public reporting also had a positive effect on RN staffing. Future research should examine patient outcomes associated with these policies, as well as potential cost savings for hospitals from reduced nurse turnover rates.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of hospital nurse-to-patient staffing ratios and sepsis bundles on patient outcomes.

Background

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

Evaluation of hospital nurse-to-patient staffing ratios and sepsis bundles on patient outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets