ArticleIntensive care medicine2025
Return on investment of rapid ICU workforce upskilling: an economic and cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Intensive care medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The environmental cost of learning: COIntensive care medicine · 2026Article
- EU preparedness and ICU capacity: where are the beds?Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Early resident perceptions of clinical readiness in Italy: associations with demographic and educational factors.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Investing in minds, measuring returns: the value of rapid ICU workforce upskilling.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Progress in educational theory and translational implementation of simulation-based education for healthcare professionals: an integrative analysis from theory to effectiveness.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Preparing Italian residents for global medical practice: the role of internationalization in education.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough healthcare crises are infrequent, they may place extraordinary stress on Intensive Care Units (ICUs), often exposing critical weaknesses in workforce planning and resulting in acute staffing shortages. This study presents a comprehensive economic evaluation of large-scale, rapid ICU workforce upskilling as a strategic response to such pressures. Specifically, we assess the cost-effectiveness, economic sustainability, and resilience-building potential of these interventions during crisis conditions.
methodsC19_SPACE, a Europe-wide upskilling initiative led by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), was implemented across 24 countries between 2020 and 2021. A societal economic evaluation and return on investment (ROI) was calculated through deterministic modeling and validated using probabilistic sensitivity analysis across a range of plausible scenarios, including variations in patient throughput, training efficacy, and healthcare system parameters.
resultsThe total societal investment in the program was €20.1 million, translating to an average cost of €1146 per participant and €1720 per Quality-Adjusted Healthcare Worker (QAHW). Deterministic modeling estimated an ROI of 478%, with program costs fully recovered in just 5.1 days. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of these findings, with a mean ROI of 455% (95% CI 130-1029%) and a median break-even point of 5.4 days (95% CI 2.66-13.04 days).
conclusionRapid, structured ICU workforce upskilling initiatives deliver substantial economic returns and significantly expands healthcare capacity. Strategic investment in emergency workforce upskilling is economically sound and crucial for healthcare system resilience during future crises.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.