Impact of a Sequential Intervention on Albumin Utilization in Critical Care*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Literature generally finds no advantages in mortality risk for albumin over cheaper alternatives in many settings. Few studies have combined financial and nonfinancial strategies to reduce albumin overuse. We evaluated the effect of a sequential multifaceted intervention on decreasing albumin use in ICU and explore the effects of different strategies. DESIGN: Prospective prepost cohort study. SETTING: Eight ICUs at two hospitals in an academic healthcare system. PATIENTS: Adult patients admitted to study ICUs from September 2011 to August 2014 (n = 22,004). INTERVENTIONS: Over 2 years, providers in study ICUs participated in an intervention to reduce albumin use involving monthly feedback and explicit financial incentives in the first year and internal guidelines and order process changes in the second year. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcomes measured were albumin orders per ICU admission, direct albumin costs, and mortality. Mean (SD) utilization decreased 37% from 2.7 orders (6.8) per admission during the baseline to 1.7 orders (4.6) during the intervention (p < 0.001). Regression analysis revealed that the intervention was independently associated with 0.9 fewer orders per admission, a 42% relative decrease. This adjusted effect consisted of an 18% reduction in the probability of using any albumin (p < 0.001) and a 29% reduction in the number of orders per admission among patients receiving any (p < 0.001). Secondary analysis revealed that probability reductions were concurrent with internal guidelines and order process modification while reductions in quantity occurred largely during the financial incentives and feedback period. Estimated cost savings totaled $2.5M during the 2-year intervention. There was no significant difference in ICU or hospital mortality between baseline and intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A sequential intervention achieved significant reductions in ICU albumin use and cost savings without changes in patient outcomes, supporting the combination of financial and nonfinancial strategies to align providers with evidence-based practices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".