The ICUPASS Study: Variability, Influencing Factors, and Clinician Stress in ICU Admission Decisions.

Authors

Cyril Chacko, Girish Kanna, Shaveta Devasar, Amit Sharma, Thomas Fisher, Jagatar S Pooni, Andrew Macduff, Shameer Gopal, Kesaven Dhamodaran, Suresh Renukappa, Suresh Subashini, Suneesh Thilak, Krishna Navaneetham, Syed Haque, Palliniswamy Matheswaran, Nasa Prashant, Tonny Veenith

Published in

Cureus. Volume 18. Issue 6. Pages e111068. Epub Jun 18, 2026.

Abstract

Objectives The objectives of this study were to quantify the variability in intensive care unit (ICU) admission decisions, identify influencing factors, and measure the associated stress among different groups of healthcare professionals. Design This was a cross-sectional survey using 10 standardised clinical vignettes. Setting The study was conducted in ICUs in the West Midlands, UK. Participants The study included 84 ICU professionals, categorised as decision-makers ([DMs] consultants and senior registrars, n=47) or non-decision-makers ([NDMs] other clinical staff, n=37). Main outcome measures For each vignette, respondents rated the likelihood of admission, associated stress, and likelihood of admission with unlimited resources on a 10-point Likert scale. The primary reason for non-admission was also selected. Results Admission likelihood was heterogeneous across all vignettes (median 5, IQR 6), with no significant difference between DMs and NDMs. DMs reported significantly lower stress than NDMs (median 4 vs 5, p<0.001). Clinically ambiguous vignettes showed the highest variability and stress. Counterintuitively, admission likelihood was significantly lower under a hypothetical unlimited-resources scenario (median 3 vs 5, p<0.001). "Futility" was the most common reason cited for non-admission. Conclusions Substantial variability and stress are inherent to ICU admission decisions, even among experienced clinicians. Subjective clinician factors shape decisions alongside objective patient data, underscoring the need for decision-support tools in ambiguous cases and strategies to ease the psychological burden on clinical staff.

PMID:
42472163
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 19 Jul 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.