MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PP512 Topic: AS23–Rehabilitation: Early Mobilization/Interdisciplinary Care/Developmental Care/Other: COST ANALYSIS OF IMPLEMENTING AN EARLY REHABILITATION BUNDLE IN A PEDIATRIC INTENSIVE CARE UNIT

2024· article· en· W4404041137 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karen Choong, Shira Gertsman, Sureka Pavalagantharajah, Leslie A. Falk, Xiaoke Feng, Katherine M. Kennedy, L. Thabane

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Critical Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaImpactMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRehabilitationBundlePediatric intensive care unitIntensive care unitIntensive care medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: We implemented an early rehabilitation bundle (PICU Liber8) focused on sedation stewardship, delirium monitoring, and early mobilization at McMaster Children’s Hospital Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) Aim: To determine the cost and resources required to implement Liber8 and compare patient-level costs pre- and post-implementation. Methods: Implementation consisted of 4 phases: Engage, Educate, Execute, and Evaluate. For human resources, we calculated hours spent by personnel and their hourly wage. Patient-level costs were calculated using Ontario Case Costing Initiative for all patients who completed a PICU stay between January-March 2019 (pre) and January-March 2020 (post-implementation period). Linear regression was used to compare total patient-level PICU and pharmacy costs respectively in the pre- and post implementation periods, adjusted for age, sex and PIM3 score. Results: A total of 949 hours were spent on developing and implementing Liber8. Majority of human resource hours (58%) were spent during Engagement. Total personnel hours cost $50,090, majority of which were contributed by physicians (attendings and fellows) ($28,497), followed by nurses ($6899) and pharmacists ($4500). We evaluated 484 pre-implementation and 316 post-implementation patient days respectively. Non-adjusted total patient costs pre-implementation was $2.5million vs. $1.5million post-implementation (adjusted mean difference 17.1% [95% CI -6.3,46.4]). Mean cost per patient day was $588 lower post-implementation ($5,052) vs. pre-implementation ($4664) Conclusions: The majority of resources required for implementing a rehabilitation are spent on engagement and planning activities. Due to larger variations in costs, statistical nonsignificance is not surpirsing. However, it is important to highlight the magnitude of the difference, not statistical significance. Keywords: Early Rehabilitation, Implementation, pediatric intensive care unit, Cost Analysis

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.347 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Critical Care MedicineSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207