A Survey of Neurology-based Intensive Care Unit Specialists

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the neurology and intensive care training of neurology specialists who have started and/or completed intensive care subspecialty training and their views on neurological intensive care organizations. Materials and Methods: All neurology specialists who have started and/or completed intensive care subspecialty training were invited to contribute a 30 question survey via e-mail or text message from mobile phone, which contained a link to the online questionnaire form. Results: There are 29 neurology specialists in Turkey who have started and/or completed intensive care subspecialty training, and all of these specialists completed the survey. Of the neurologists, 12 reported that they completed the intensive care subspecialty training, 12 continued their intensive care subspecialty training, and 5 left the training process. Of the neurologists, 86.2% stated that they wanted to work in neurological intensive care units, 79.3% stated that neurological and neurosurgical intensive care units should be combined, 75.9% stated that they could work in these common intensive care units. However, it was determined that none of the 12 neurology-based intensive care specialists could work in the neurological intensive care units. Conclusion: Studies have shown that providing neurocritical care services, neurological intensive care units and neurointensivists could improve clinical outcomes in patients with neurocritical illnesses. In our study, neurology-based intensive care specialists reported that they could not work in neurological intensive care units. Worldwide neurointensivists cared for only a fifth of patients in neurological intensive care units. Neurointensivists need to manage neurological intensive care units to improve patient outcomes both in the world and in Turkey.

Keywords

• neurointensivist
• neurological intensive care unit
• subspecialty