Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 7(7): e2419844, 2024 Jul 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38967925

RESUMO

Importance: Motor vehicle crash (MVC) and firearm injuries are 2 of the top 3 mechanisms of adult injury-related deaths in the US. Objective: To understand the differing associations between community-level disadvantage and firearm vs MVC injuries to inform mechanism-specific prevention strategies and appropriate postdischarge resource allocation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cross-sectional study analyzed prospectively collected data from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Firearm Study. Included patients were treated either for firearm injury between March 1, 2021, and February 28, 2022, or for MVC-related injuries between January 1 and December 31, 2021, at 1 of 128 participating ACS trauma centers. Exposures: Community distress. Main outcome and Measure: Odds of presenting with a firearm as compared with MVC injury based on levels of community distress, as measured by the Distressed Communities Index (DCI) and categorized in quintiles. Results: A total of 62 981 patients were included (mean [SD] age, 42.9 [17.7] years; 42 388 male [67.3%]; 17 737 Black [28.2%], 9052 Hispanic [14.4%], 36 425 White [57.8%]) from 104 trauma centers. By type, there were 53 474 patients treated for MVC injuries and 9507 treated for firearm injuries. Patients with firearm injuries were younger (median [IQR] age, 31.0 [24.0-40.0] years vs 41.0 [29.0-58.0] years); more likely to be male (7892 of 9507 [83.0%] vs 34 496 of 53 474 [64.5%]), identified as Black (5486 of 9507 [57.7%] vs 12 251 of 53 474 [22.9%]), and Medicaid insured or uninsured (6819 of 9507 [71.7%] vs 21 310 of 53 474 [39.9%]); and had a higher DCI score (median [IQR] score, 74.0 [53.2-94.8] vs 58.0 [33.0-83.0]) than MVC injured patients. Among admitted patients, the odds of presenting with a firearm injury compared with MVC injury were 1.50 (95% CI, 1.35-1.66) times higher for patients living in the most distressed vs least distressed ZIP codes. After controlling for age, sex, race, ethnicity, and payer type, the DCI components associated with the highest adjusted odds of presenting with a firearm injury were a high housing vacancy rate (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.19) and high poverty rate (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24). Among patients sustaining firearm injuries patients, 4333 (54.3%) received no referrals for postdischarge rehabilitation, home health, or psychosocial services. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of adults with firearm- and motor vehicle-related injuries, we found that patients from highly distressed communities had higher odds of presenting to a trauma center with a firearm injury as opposed to an MVC injury. With two-thirds of firearm injury survivors treated at trauma centers being discharged without psychosocial services, community-level measures of disadvantage may be useful for allocating postdischarge care resources to patients with the greatest need.


Assuntos
Acidentes de Trânsito , Ferimentos por Arma de Fogo , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Ferimentos por Arma de Fogo/epidemiologia , Estudos Transversais , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Acidentes de Trânsito/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Armas de Fogo/estatística & dados numéricos
2.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38654417

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: While the U.S. has high quality data on firearm-related deaths, less information is available on those who arrive at trauma centers alive, especially those discharged from the emergency department. This study sought to describe characteristics of patients arriving to trauma centers alive following a firearm injury, postulating that significant differences in firearm injury intent might provide insights into injury prevention strategies. METHODS: This was a multi-center prospective cohort study of patients treated for firearm-related injuries at 128 U.S. trauma centers from 3/2021-2/2022. Data collected included patient-level sociodemographic, injury and clinical characteristics, community characteristics, and context of injury. The outcome of interest was the association between these factors and the intent of firearm injury. Measures of urbanicity, community distress, and strength of state firearm laws were utilized to characterize patient communities. RESULTS: 15,232 patients presented with firearm-related injuries across 128 centers in 41 states. Overall, 9.5% of patients died, and deaths were more common among law enforcement and self-inflicted (SI) firearm injuries (80.9% and 50.5%, respectively). These patients were also more likely to have a history of mental illness. SI firearm injuries were more common in older White men from rural and less distressed communities, whereas firearm assaults were more common in younger, Black men from urban and more distressed communities. Unintentional injuries were more common among younger patients and in states with lower firearm safety grades whereas law enforcement-related injuries occurred most often in unemployed patients with a history of mental illness. CONCLUSIONS: Injury, clinical, sociodemographic, and community characteristics among patients injured by a firearm significantly differed between intents. With the goal of reducing firearm-related deaths, strategies and interventions need to be tailored to include community improvement and services that address specific patient risk factors for firearm injury intent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Prognostic/Epidemiological.

3.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg ; 96(3): 455-460, 2024 Mar 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37934626

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Firearms are commonplace in the United States, and one proposed strategy to decrease risk of firearm injury is to have physicians counsel their patients about safe firearm ownership. Current rates of firearm safety counseling by surgeons who care for injured people are unknown. METHODS: This study used an anonymous cross-sectional survey derived from previously published survey instruments and was piloted (n = 13) at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (2022). The finalized survey was distributed using a quick response code during two sessions at the 2022 American College of Surgeons Clinical Congress. Eligible participants included the surgeons and surgical trainees who attended these sessions. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen individuals completed the survey (20% response rate), and a majority were male (n = 71 [62.3%]), attending surgeons (n = 108 [94.7%]), and specialized in acute care surgery (n = 72 [63.2%]). Few participants (n = 43 [37.7%]) reported counseling patients on firearm safety as part of their routine clinical practice; however, the majority (n = 102 [89.5%]) believed that surgeons should provide firearm safety counseling. Counseling rates did not vary significantly by age, sex, surgical specialty, or region of practice, but attitudes toward counseling did differ by firearm safety counseling practices ( p = 0.03) and region of practice (0.04). Noted barriers to counseling included lack of time (n = 47 [41.2%]), perceived lack of training (n = 43 [37.7%]), and lack of firearm knowledge/experience (n = 36 [31.6%]). CONCLUSION: Most surgeon respondents did not provide firearm safety counseling to their patients despite the fact the majority believed they should. This suggests that counseling interventions that do not solely rely on surgeons for implementation could increase the number of patients who receive firearm safety guidance during clinical encounters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.


Assuntos
Armas de Fogo , Cirurgiões , Ferimentos por Arma de Fogo , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos , Feminino , Segurança , Estudos Transversais , Ferimentos por Arma de Fogo/prevenção & controle , Aconselhamento
4.
Cureus ; 14(8): e28548, 2022 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36185866

RESUMO

Background Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed less than 72 hours from hospital admission for acute cholecystitis has shown to decrease hospital cost without an increase in length of stay (LOS). Very few studies have examined clinical and cost outcomes of performing cholecystectomy less than 24 hours from hospital admission. The aim of this study was to examine the cost and LOS of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed on an early (less than 24 hours from admission) and late (more than 24 hours from hospital admission) basis. Methods We performed a retrospective observational study of 569 patients at Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, USA, who underwent urgent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis between January 1, 2018 and February 28, 2020. We evaluated preoperative/postoperative LOS, operative duration, hospital cost, and patient complications. Results 468 patients underwent urgent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis during our study period. Early cholecystectomy (less than 24 hours from admission) had an overall decreased LOS (43.6 hours versus 102.9 hours, p-value < 0.01) and decreased hospital cost ($23,736.70 versus $30,176.40, p-value < 0.01) compared to late cholecystectomy (more than 24 hours from admission). There was also a significantly higher rate of bile leak in patients who underwent surgery more than 24 hours from hospital admission compared to those who had surgery less than 24 hours from admission (5.9% versus 0.4%, p-value < 0.01). Additionally, those procedures performed greater than 24 hours from hospital admission were significantly more likely to be converted to an open procedure (6.9% versus 2.2%, p-value = 0.02).  Conclusion Urgent laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed within 24 hours of hospital admission for acute cholecystitis decreased hospital cost, LOS, and operative complications in our institution's patient population. Our data suggests that performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 24 hours of hospital admission would be beneficial from a patient and hospital standpoint.

5.
Cureus ; 13(3): e13900, 2021 Mar 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33880256

RESUMO

Background Today's residency applicants submit more applications than those in the past. To facilitate holistic review, many program directors have encouraged applicants to submit fewer applications. However, whether programs provide sufficient information to help applicants determine where to apply is unclear. Objective To evaluate the frequency of missing information on residency program websites and in the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA). Methods We used FREIDA to identify all categorical pediatric residency programs in the United States. We noted the presence of information programs reported in each FREIDA data field. We compared information available on the program website for consistency with the information in FREIDA and additionally searched for current resident information and any description of the qualities of applicants/residents desired on the program website. Results Two hundred and eleven pediatric residency programs were included in FREIDA. Approximately 25% of programs did not include basic information such as number of first year residents, salary, work hours, or consideration of applicants requiring work visas. Over half of programs did not report minimum licensing examination scores required for interview consideration. Discrepancies between information on program websites and FREIDA related to work visas occurred in 6-8% of programs. While 88% of program websites included information on current residents, only 17% included any description of the applicant attributes sought by the program. Conclusions Many pediatric residency programs do not provide much of the information that applicants need to help determine if a program is a good fit or whether their application is competitive.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA