Effect of Tele-ICU on Clinical Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients: The TELESCOPE Randomized Clinical Trial
Adriano J Pereira,Danilo T Noritomi,Maura Cristina Dos Santos,Thiago D Corrêa,Leonardo J R Ferraz,Guilherme P P Schettino,Eduardo Cordioli,Renata A Morbeck,Lúbia C Morais,Jorge I F Salluh,Luciano C P Azevedo,Rodrigo S Biondi,Regis G Rosa,Alexandre B Cavalcanti,Otavio Berwanger,Ary Serpa Neto,Otavio T Ranzani
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.20651
IF: 11.816
2024-10-09
JAMA
Abstract:Importance: Despite its implementation in several countries, there has not been a randomized clinical trial to assess whether telemedicine in intensive care units (ICUs) could improve clinical outcomes of critically ill patients. Objective: To determine whether an intervention comprising daily multidisciplinary rounds and monthly audit and feedback meetings performed by a remote board-certified intensivist reduces ICU length of stay (LOS) compared with usual care. Design, setting, and participants: A parallel cluster randomized clinical trial with a baseline period in 30 general ICUs in Brazil in which daily multidisciplinary rounds performed by board-certified intensivists were not routinely available. All consecutive adult patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to the participating ICUs, excluding those admitted due to justice-related issues, were enrolled between June 1, 2019, and April 7, 2021, with last follow-up on July 6, 2021. Intervention: Remote daily multidisciplinary rounds led by a board-certified intensivist through telemedicine, monthly audit and feedback meetings for discussion of ICU performance indicators, and provision of evidence-based clinical protocols. Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was ICU LOS at the patient level. Secondary outcomes included ICU efficiency, in-hospital mortality, incidence of central line-associated bloodstream infections, ventilator-associated events, catheter-associated urinary tract infections, ventilator-free days at 28 days, patient-days receiving oral or enteral feeding, patient-days under light sedation, and rate of patients with oxygen saturation values under that of normoxemia, assessed using generalized linear mixed models. Results: Among 17 024 patients (1794 in the baseline period and 15 230 in the intervention period), the mean (SD) age was 61 (18) years, 44.7% were female, the median (IQR) Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 6 (2-9), and 45.5% were invasively mechanically ventilated at admission. The median (IQR) time under intervention was 20 (16-21) months. Mean (SD) ICU LOS, adjusted for baseline assessment, did not differ significantly between the tele-critical care and usual care groups (8.1 [10.0] and 7.1 [9.0] days; percentage change, 8.2% [95% CI, -5.4% to 23.8%]; P = .24). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses and prespecified subgroups. There were no statistically significant differences in any other secondary or exploratory outcomes. Conclusions and relevance: Daily multidisciplinary rounds conducted by a board-certified intensivist through telemedicine did not reduce ICU LOS in critically ill adult patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03920501.