Evaluating and planning ICUs: methods and approaches to differentiate between need and demand.
OBJECTIVE: In all western countries the demand for ICU-services is increasing and complaints about a lack of ICU-beds arise--independent of the actual density of ICU-services. The demand for more ICU-beds triggered a debate on whether it is possible to define an "objective" need. It was the aim of the assessment to analyze conventional as well as innovative approaches to plan and to evaluate ICU-services. METHOD: Systematic review, multistep searches in Medline, EmBase, Cochrane, HTA-Database, websearches, informal searches through planning and HTA-networks. INTRODUCTION: The differences between the density of intensive care in Europe and other parts of the western world is enormous. At a first superficial glance, Austria and Germany--in absolute figures--have many more ICU-beds than any other European country. In relative figures, taken into consideration that Austria and Germany have also many more acute care beds, the number of ICU-beds is among European average. It is therefore, impossible to analyze the need for ICU-beds without taking into account the national context of delivered acute hospital services. Although ICU-services take about 15-20% of the hospital budgets, there are still more questions than answers. RESULTS: Recent planning-documents: a review of trends in recent planning shows that all planners calculate on the basis of existing style of practice within their countries; the figures change only marginally. But while planners in countries with a relatively low ICU-bed density (Great Britan, Australia, Canada) certify a certain need for an increase, planners in countries with high density (USA, Germany, Austria) state a "satisfied need" and an over-provision of ICU-services. Innovative planners apply an "appropriateness of ICU-use" approach with analysing the actual utilisation by interpreting scores (especially TISS) and by identifying "low-risk" groups and propose a more flexible organisation of ICUs and a higher proportion of (intermediate care unit) IMCU-beds. Clinical and ICU-management tools, such as admission and discharge guidelines, strategies to reduce treatment-variations, certain organisational changes (leadership, horizontal hierarchy) and costing methods gain importance for better, more efficient and co-ordinated use of ICU-resources. CONCLUSION: In countries with a high density of ICU-services--such as Austria and Germany--not an expanding of the capacities, but a better use of the existing resources is recommended. For a fair comparison, participation in national databases, in registers as well as benchmarking and quality-assurance programs should be enforced.