Major Obstacles to Implement a Full-Time Intensivist in Korean Adult ICUs: a Questionnaire Survey

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Background:

Critical care physician staffing is a crucial element of the intensive care unit (ICU) organization, and is associated with better outcomes in ICUs. Adult ICUs in Korea have been suffering from inadequate full-time intensivists and nurses because of insufficient reimbursement rates (<50% of the original critical care cost) from the National Health Insurance System. Recently, full-time intensivists have been introduced as a prerequisite for adult ICUs of tertiary hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this study was to examine the perception of intensivist staffing among critical care program directors regarding the barriers and solutions when implementing an intensivist model of critical care in Korea.


Methods:

An email survey of critical care program directors in designated teaching hospitals for critical care subspecialty training by the Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine was performed. The survey domains included vision, culture, resources, barriers, and potential solutions to implementing intensivist physician staffing (IPS).


Results:

Forty-two critical care program directors were surveyed. A total of 28 directors (66.7%) responded to email queries. Of these, 27 directors (96.4%) agreed that IPS would improve the quality of care in the ICU, although half of them reported a negative perception of relevant clinical colleagues for the role of full-time intensivists and poor resources for IPS in their hospitals. Increased financial burden due to hiring full-time intensivists and concerns regarding exclusion from the management of their critically ill patients in the ICU, together with loss of income for primary attending physicians were stated by the respondents to be major barriers to implementing IPS. Financial incentives for the required cost from the health insurance system and enhancement of medical law relevant to critical care were regarded as solutions to these issues.


Conclusions:

Critical care program directors believe that intensivist-led critical care can improve the outcome of ICUs. They indicated the financial burden due to IPS and underestimation of a full-time intensivist’s role to be major barriers. The program directors agreed that a partnership between hospital leaders and the Ministry of Health and Welfare was needed to overcome these barriers.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Background:

Critical care physician staffing is a crucial element of the intensive care unit (ICU) organization, and is associated with better outcomes in ICUs. Adult ICUs in Korea have been suffering from inadequate full-time intensivists and nurses because of insufficient reimbursement rates (<50% of the original critical care cost) from the National Health Insurance System. Recently, full-time intensivists have been introduced as a prerequisite for adult ICUs of tertiary hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this study was to examine the perception of intensivist staffing among critical care program directors regarding the barriers and solutions when implementing an intensivist model of critical care in Korea.




Methods:

An email survey of critical care program directors in designated teaching hospitals for critical care subspecialty training by the Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine was performed. The survey domains included vision, culture, resources, barriers, and potential solutions to implementing intensivist physician staffing (IPS).




Results:

Forty-two critical care program directors were surveyed. A total of 28 directors (66.7%) responded to email queries. Of these, 27 directors (96.4%) agreed that IPS would improve the quality of care in the ICU, although half of them reported a negative perception of relevant clinical colleagues for the role of full-time intensivists and poor resources for IPS in their hospitals. Increased financial burden due to hiring full-time intensivists and concerns regarding exclusion from the management of their critically ill patients in the ICU, together with loss of income for primary attending physicians were stated by the respondents to be major barriers to implementing IPS. Financial incentives for the required cost from the health insurance system and enhancement of medical law relevant to critical care were regarded as solutions to these issues.




Conclusions:

Critical care program directors believe that intensivist-led critical care can improve the outcome of ICUs. They indicated the financial burden due to IPS and underestimation of a full-time intensivist’s role to be major barriers. The program directors agreed that a partnership between hospital leaders and the Ministry of Health and Welfare was needed to overcome these barriers.