TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing Critical Care Delivery Using National-Level ICU Registry Data
AU - the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) U.S. ICU Registry Working Group
AU - Kasotakis, George
AU - Kuriyama, Akira
AU - Smalls, Norma
AU - Connor, Kathryn A.
AU - Dempsey, Timothy
AU - Miller, Andrew G.
AU - Bittner, Edward A.
AU - Jaehne, Anja Kathrin
AU - Temsah, Mohamad Hani
AU - Siddiqui, Shahla
AU - Bell, Carolyn M.
AU - Khanna, Ashish K.
AU - Biswas, Saptarshi
AU - Slain, Katherine
AU - Akuamoah-Boateng, Kwame
AU - Owusu, Kent A.
AU - Sakhuja, Ankit
AU - Boomer, Laura
AU - Setliff, Erika L.
AU - Neyra, Javier A.
AU - Rincon, Teresa
AU - Bose, Somnath
AU - Barwise, Amelia
AU - Alexander, Peta
AU - Dugar, Siddharth
AU - Cantrell, Sarah
AU - Shein, Steven L.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2025/12
Y1 - 2025/12
N2 - Objective: – The specialty of critical care in the United States currently lacks a single, broad, unified database. We conducted a scoping review of existing established national ICU databases, describing national and international patterns of critical care delivery. Data Sources: – A systematic literature search was undertaken using MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science search engines. Study Selection: – Projects describing national critical care delivery (including any subspecialty) published in any language were included. Titles, abstracts, and full-text manuscripts were reviewed in duplicate for inclusion. Data Extraction: – National database characteristics were collected, including the number and subspecialty of ICUs, the inaugural year, data entry methodology, the number of episodes of care included, and captured clinical data elements. Data Synthesis: – Of 24, 003 abstracts screened, 185 manuscripts were eligible for inclusion. Thirty countries were identified as having established national ICU registries: Argentina, Australia/New Zealand, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Paraguay, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States and Uruguay. Data entry commonly incorporates a combination of automated data abstraction from electronic healthcare systems and manual data entry, followed by independent validation. Frequently recorded variables include patient demographics; admission vital signs and laboratory data; comorbidities; admission source and diagnoses; ICU diagnoses, treatments, and complications; illness severity scores; and clinically relevant outcomes including discharge disposition, functional status, lengths of stay, and mortality. Conclusions: – Insights and experience gained from the study of mature national ICU registries may be used to guide an equivalent U.S.
AB - Objective: – The specialty of critical care in the United States currently lacks a single, broad, unified database. We conducted a scoping review of existing established national ICU databases, describing national and international patterns of critical care delivery. Data Sources: – A systematic literature search was undertaken using MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science search engines. Study Selection: – Projects describing national critical care delivery (including any subspecialty) published in any language were included. Titles, abstracts, and full-text manuscripts were reviewed in duplicate for inclusion. Data Extraction: – National database characteristics were collected, including the number and subspecialty of ICUs, the inaugural year, data entry methodology, the number of episodes of care included, and captured clinical data elements. Data Synthesis: – Of 24, 003 abstracts screened, 185 manuscripts were eligible for inclusion. Thirty countries were identified as having established national ICU registries: Argentina, Australia/New Zealand, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Paraguay, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States and Uruguay. Data entry commonly incorporates a combination of automated data abstraction from electronic healthcare systems and manual data entry, followed by independent validation. Frequently recorded variables include patient demographics; admission vital signs and laboratory data; comorbidities; admission source and diagnoses; ICU diagnoses, treatments, and complications; illness severity scores; and clinically relevant outcomes including discharge disposition, functional status, lengths of stay, and mortality. Conclusions: – Insights and experience gained from the study of mature national ICU registries may be used to guide an equivalent U.S.
KW - Database
KW - big data
KW - critical care
KW - epidemiology
KW - healthcare delivery
KW - national
KW - outcomes
KW - registry
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105023870149
U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006886
DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006886
M3 - Review article
C2 - 41139471
AN - SCOPUS:105023870149
SN - 0090-3493
VL - 53
SP - e2674-e2685
JO - Critical Care Medicine
JF - Critical Care Medicine
IS - 12
ER -