IntroductionWe investigated the potential benefits of early tracheotomy performed before day eight of mechanical ventilation (MV) compared with late tracheotomy (from day 14 if it still indicated) in reducing mortality, days of MV, days of sedation and ICU length of stay (LOS).MethodsRandomized controlled trial (RCT) including all-consecutive ICU admitted patients requiring seven or more days of MV. Between days five to seven of MV, before randomization, the attending physician (AP) was consulted about the expected duration of MV and acceptance of tracheotomy according to randomization. Only accepted patients received tracheotomy as result of randomization. An intention to treat analysis was performed including patients accepted for the AP and those rejected without exclusion criteria.ResultsA total of 489 patients were included in the RCT. Of 245 patients randomized to the early group, the procedure was performed for 167 patients (68.2%) whereas in the 244 patients randomized to the late group was performed for 135 patients (55.3%) (P <0.004). Mortality at day 90 was similar in both groups (25.7% versus 29.9%), but duration of sedation was shorter in the early tracheotomy group median 11 days (range 2 to 92) days compared to 14 days (range 0 to 79) in the late group (P <0.02). The AP accepted the protocol of randomization in 205 cases (42%), 101 were included in early group and 104 in the late group. In these subgroup of patients (per-protocol analysis) no differences existed in mortality at day 90 between the two groups, but the early group had more ventilator-free days, less duration of sedation and less LOS, than the late group.ConclusionsThis study shows that early tracheotomy reduces the days of sedation in patients undergoing MV, but was underpowered to prove any other benefit. In those patients selected by their attending physicians as potential candidates for a tracheotomy, an early procedure can lessen the days of MV, the days of sedation and LOS. However, the imprecision of physicians to select patients who will require prolonged MV challenges the potential benefits of early tracheotomy.Trial registrationControlled-Trials.com ISRCTN22208087. Registered 27 March 2014.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-014-0585-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate how hospital capacity was managed focusing on standardizing the admission and discharge processes.MethodsThis study was set in a 900-bed university affiliated hospital of the National Health Service, near Barcelona (Spain). This is a cross-sectional study of a set of interventions which were gradually implemented between April and December 2008. Mainly, they were focused on standardizing the admission and discharge processes to improve patient flow. Primary administrative data was obtained from the 2007 and 2009 Hospital Database. Main outcome measures were median length of stay, percentage of planned discharges, number of surgery cancellations and median number of delayed emergency admissions at 8:00 am. For statistical bivariate analysis, we used a Chi-squared for linear trend for qualitative variables and a Wilcoxon signed ranks test and a Mann–Whitney test for non-normal continuous variables.ResultsThe median patients’ global length of stay was 8.56 days in 2007 and 7.93 days in 2009 (p < 0.051). The percentage of patients admitted the same day as surgery increased from 64.87% in 2007 to 86.01% in 2009 (p < 0.05). The number of cancelled interventions due to lack of beds was 216 patients in 2007 and 42 patients in 2009. The median number of planned discharges went from 43.05% in 2007 to 86.01% in 2009 (p < 0.01). The median number of emergency patients waiting for an in-hospital bed at 8:00 am was 5 patients in 2007 and 3 patients in 2009 (p < 0.01).ConclusionsIn conclusion, standardization of admission and discharge processes are largely in our control. There is a significant opportunity to create important benefits for increasing bed capacity and hospital throughput.

BackgroundThe increasing demand on hospitalisation, either due to elective activity from the waiting lists or due to emergency admissions coming from the Emergency Department (ED), requires looking for strategies that lead to effective bed management. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a surgery admission unit for major elective surgery patients who were admitted for same-day surgery.MethodsWe included all patients admitted for elective surgery in a university tertiary hospital between the 1st of September and the 31st of December 2006, as well as those admitted during the same period of 2008, after the introduction of the Surgery Admission Unit. The main outcome parameters were global length of stay, pre-surgery length of stay, proportion of patients admitted the same day of the surgery and number of cancellations. Differences between the two periods were evaluated by the T-test and Chi-square test. Significance at P < 0.05 was assumed throughout.ResultsWe included 6,053 patients, 3,003 during 2006 and 3,050 patients during 2008. Global length of stay was 6.2 days (IC 95%:6.4-6) in 2006 and 5.5 days (IC 95%:5.8-5.2) in 2008 (p < 0.005). Pre-surgery length of stay was reduced from 0.46 days (IC 95%:0.44-0.48) in 2006 to 0.29 days (IC 95%:0.27-0.31) in 2008 (p < 0.005). The proportion of patients admitted for same-day surgery was 67% (IC 95%:69%-65%) in 2006 and 76% (IC 95%:78%-74%) in 2008 (p < 0.005). The number of cancelled interventions due to insufficient preparation was 31 patients in 2006 and 7 patients in 2008.ConclusionsThe implementation of a Surgery Admission Unit for patients undergoing major elective surgery has proved to be an effective strategy for improving bed management. It has enabled an improvement in the proportion of patients admitted on the same day as surgery and a shorter length of stay.