Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros













Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36188431

RESUMO

Background: Rural patients experience worse cancer survival outcomes than urban patients despite similar incidence rates, due in part to significant barriers to accessing quality cancer care. Community hospitals in non-metropolitan/rural areas play a crucial role in providing care to patients who desire and are able to receive care locally. However, rural community hospitals typically face challenges to providing comprehensive care due to lack of resources. The University of Kentucky's Markey Cancer Center Affiliate Network (MCCAN) is an effective complex, multi-level intervention, improving cancer care in rural/under-resourced hospitals by supporting them in achieving American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) standards. With the long-term goal of adapting MCCAN for other rural contexts, we aimed to identify MCCAN's core functions (i.e., the components key to the intervention's effectiveness/implementation) using theory-driven qualitative data research methods. Methods: We conducted eight semi-structured virtual interviews with administrators, coordinators, clinicians, and certified tumor registrars from five MCCAN affiliate hospitals that were not CoC-accredited prior to joining MCCAN. Study team members coded interview transcripts and identified themes related to how MCCAN engaged affiliate sites in improving care quality (intervention functions) and implementing CoC standards (implementation functions) and analyzed themes to identify core functions. We then mapped core functions onto existing theories of change and presented the functions to MCCAN leadership to confirm validity and completeness of the functions. Results: Intervention core functions included: providing expertise and templates for achieving accreditation, establishing a culture of quality-improvement among affiliates, and fostering a shared goal of quality care. Implementation core functions included: fostering a sense of community and partnership, building trust between affiliates and Markey, providing information and resources to increase feasibility and acceptability of meeting CoC standards, and mentoring and empowering administrators and clinicians to champion implementation. Conclusion: The MCCAN intervention presents a more equitable strategy of extending the resources and expertise of large cancer centers to assist smaller community hospitals in achieving evidence-based standards for cancer care. Using rigorous qualitative methods, we distilled this intervention into its core functions, positioning us (and others) to adapt the MCCAN intervention to address cancer disparities in other rural contexts.

2.
J Clin Anesth ; 15(3): 206-10, 2003 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12770657

RESUMO

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Moving the last case of the day from one operating room (OR) to another OR can increase OR efficiency. However, there is a penalty cost for moving a case. The goal of the study was to measure perceptions of the minimum time that needs to be saved for it to be worthwhile to move a case from a late-running OR to another OR. DESIGN: Internet-based survey of the Association of Anesthesia Clinical Directors (AACD) and/or attendees at one of its courses. As subjects completed the computer-assisted survey, answers to test questions were checked immediately to ensure respondents understood the relevant concepts. MEASUREMENTS: Respondents were asked to complete the statement: "I would move the case if I would expect to save ____ hours of overutilized OR time." MAIN RESULTS: 234 E-mail invitations to complete the survey were transmitted. Of that number, 87 completed surveys were returned. Respondents were physicians, mostly from the United States. The 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of the penalty cost were 1.0 hour of overutilized OR time. The 95% confidence intervals were 0.5 to 1.0 hour for the 25th percentile, 1.0 to 1.0 hour for the 50th percentile, and 1.0 to 2.0 hours for the 75th percentile. There was no significant correlation between the penalty cost and the number of ORs at the respondent's facility, number of times the survey was submitted until it was completed correctly, or total number of errors in responses. CONCLUSIONS: Members of the AACD perceive the penalty cost for moving a case to be 1 hour.


Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Anestesia/organização & administração , Salas Cirúrgicas/organização & administração , Serviço Hospitalar de Anestesia/economia , Custos e Análise de Custo , Coleta de Dados , Internet , Salas Cirúrgicas/economia , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios , Transporte de Pacientes , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA