Comparing Outcomes Between Advanced Practice Providers and Housestaff Teams in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit

With an increasing demand for critical care expertise and limitations in intensivist availability, innovative staffing models, such as the utilization of advanced practice providers (APPs), have emerged.

The purpose of the study was to compare patient outcomes between APP and housestaff teams in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU).

This retrospective study, spanning March 2022 to July 2023, compares patient characteristics and outcomes between two CICU teams embedded in the same CICU at a large urban academic hospital: one staffed by housestaff and the other by APPs (80% physician assistants, 20% nurse practitioners) who each had approximately 1 to 2 years of experience in the CICU. The primary outcome was CICU mortality. Multivariable Cox regression analyses and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to assess the primary outcome.

A total of 1,620 admissions were analyzed: 1,013 patients on the housestaff service and 607 patients on the APP service. There were no significant differences in patient demographics, admitting diagnoses, use of vasoactive medications, inotropes, or mechanical circulatory support. There was no difference in CICU mortality (8.4% vs 8.2%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.73; 95% CI: 0.51-1.05; P = 0.10), in-hospital mortality (13.5% vs 13.8%, aHR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.62-1.08; P = 0.17), or in-hospital length of stay between the housestaff and APP teams. Patients managed by the housestaff team had a lower CICU length of stay (2 days IQR: 1-4 days] vs 3 days [IQR: 1-5 days], P = 0.047). Fellowship rotation scores (based on surveys completed by the cardiology fellows) of the CICU also improved after the implementation of the APP-based team (3.87 ± 0.14 before vs 4.61 ± 0.06 after, P < 0.0001).

Our moderately sized study demonstrated no difference in CICU or in-hospital mortality between patients managed by a housestaff team versus those managed by an APP team.