RESUMEN
Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health issue with a substantial burden on society. Screening and intervention practices vary widely and there are no standard guidelines. Our objective was to review research on current practices for IPV prevention in emergency departments and trauma centers in the USA and provide evidenced-based recommendations. Methods: An evidence-based systematic review of the literature was conducted to address screening and intervention for IPV in adult trauma and emergency department patients. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology was used to determine the quality of evidence. Studies were included if they addressed our prespecified population, intervention, control, and outcomes questions. Case reports, editorials, and abstracts were excluded from review. Results: Seven studies met inclusion criteria. All seven were centered around screening for IPV; none addressed interventions when abuse was identified. Screening instruments varied across studies. Although it is unclear if one tool is more accurate than others, significantly more victims were identified when screening protocols were implemented compared with non-standardized approaches to identifying IPV victims. Conclusion: Overall, there were very limited data addressing the topic of IPV screening and intervention in emergency medical settings, and the quality of the evidence was low. With likely low risk and a significant potential benefit, we conditionally recommend implementation of a screening protocol to identify victims of IPV in adults treated in the emergency department and trauma centers. Although the purpose of screening would ultimately be to provide resources for victims, no studies that assessed distinct interventions met our inclusion criteria. Therefore, we cannot make specific recommendations related to IPV interventions. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020219517.
RESUMEN
Background: Post-operative day zero (POD-0) discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis has been studied primarily in single-center or pediatric studies. A larger study from a national sample addressing high-yield outcomes can update and supplement current literature and evaluate early discharge rates.Methods: This is a retrospective, observational National Surgical Quality Improvement (NSQIP) database study of laparoscopic appendectomies for uncomplicated appendicitis performed 2016-2019, with discharge POD-0 or post-operative day one (POD-1). Study outcomes included any or serious complication, unplanned readmission, and unplanned return to operating room (OR). Unadjusted outcomes comparisons were estimated via chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to adjust for potential confounders (sex, ethnicity, frailty, ASA score, tobacco use and diabetes).Results: A total of 25,629 patients were included in this analysis. More patients were discharged POD-1 (n = 15,229) than POD-0 (n = 10,440). Rate of any or serious complication was lower in patients discharged POD-0 than POD-1 (any complication: 2.0 vs. 2.8, p = 0.0002, serious complication: 1.4 vs. 2.1, p < 0.0001). Unplanned return to OR and unplanned readmission rates were not different between POD-0 and POD-1 discharged groups (p = 0.9 and p = 0.6, respectively). These findings were robust to adjustment for covariates in logistic regression modeling.Conclusions: This study found that unplanned readmission and other outcomes do not appear to be adversely affected by early discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis, confirming prior evidence on the topic in a large, national sample. It also found that early discharge does not appear to be used in most of these patients.
Post-operative day 0 discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis does not increase readmission or return to OR but is it happening in practice?
