Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Healthc Qual ; 45(5): 272-279, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37039811

RESUMO

PURPOSE: A primary cause of hospital readmission is medication-related problems (MRPs). Polypharmacy patients taking multiple medications concurrently experience an increased likelihood of MRPs and high occurrence of readmissions to the hospital within 30 days. This study assessed the ability of a pharmacist-led transition of care program to decrease readmissions in polypharmacy patients by evaluating and rectifying MRPs. METHODS: Over 16 months, patients admitted onto the medicine ward service with ≥10 home medications ( n = 536) received medication management interventions from a clinical pharmacist including admission interview, medication reconciliation and consultation, and postdischarge phone follow-up. Admitted patients taking fewer than 10 home medications during the same time served as the control group and received routine standard of care ( n = 2317). RESULTS: The polypharmacy group who received the pharmacist-led intervention had a statistically significantly lower 30-day readmission rate (8.8%) compared with patients in the control group (12.4%; X 2 = 5.63, p = .01). Patients receiving pharmacist intervention were 33% less likely to be readmitted within 30 days of discharge compared with the control group (odds ratio = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.49-0.94). All patients had at least one medication-related discrepancy. CONCLUSION: This pharmacy-led transition of care program can effectively reduce readmission rates through resolution of medication-related problems.


Assuntos
Alta do Paciente , Readmissão do Paciente , Humanos , Farmacêuticos , Transferência de Pacientes , Assistência ao Convalescente , Reconciliação de Medicamentos , Hospitais
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 77(5): 672-679, 2023 09 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36881940

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: We sought to compare the outcomes of patients treated with intravenous (IV)-only vs oral transitional antimicrobial therapy for infective endocarditis (IE) after implementing a new expected practice within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC DHS). METHODS: We conducted a multicentered, retrospective cohort study of adults with definite or possible IE treated with IV-only vs oral therapy at the 3 acute care public hospitals in the LAC DHS system between December 2018 and June 2022. The primary outcome was clinical success at 90 days, defined as being alive and without recurrence of bacteremia or treatment-emergent infectious complications. RESULTS: We identified 257 patients with IE treated with IV-only (n = 211) or oral transitional (n = 46) therapy who met study inclusion criteria. Study arms were similar for many demographics; however, the IV cohort was older, had more aortic valve involvement, were hemodialysis patients, and had central venous catheters present. In contrast, the oral cohort had a higher percentage of IE caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. There was no significant difference between the groups in clinical success at 90 days or last follow-up. There was no difference in recurrence of bacteremia or readmission rates. However, patients treated with oral therapy had significantly fewer adverse events. Multivariable regression adjustments did not find significant associations between any selected variables and clinical success across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate similar outcomes of real-world use of oral vs IV-only therapy for IE, in accord with prior randomized, controlled trials and meta-analyses.


Assuntos
Bacteriemia , Endocardite Bacteriana , Endocardite , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina , Infecções Estafilocócicas , Adulto , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos de Coortes , Endocardite Bacteriana/tratamento farmacológico , Endocardite/tratamento farmacológico , Bacteriemia/tratamento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Infecções Estafilocócicas/tratamento farmacológico
3.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 9(1): ofab620, 2022 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35036466

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the comparative efficacy of fosfomycin vs ertapenem for outpatient treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study involving patients with cUTI treated with outpatient oral fosfomycin vs intravenous ertapenem at 3 public hospitals in Los Angeles County between January 2018 and September 2020. The primary outcome was resolution of clinical symptoms 30 days after diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 322 patients with cUTI treated with fosfomycin (n = 110) or ertapenem (n = 212) meeting study criteria. The study arms had similar demographics, although patients treated with ertapenem more frequently had pyelonephritis or bacteremia while fosfomycin-treated patients had more retained catheters, nephrolithiasis, or urinary obstruction. Most infections were due to extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae, 80%-90% of which were resistant to other oral options. Adjusted odds ratios for clinical success at 30 days, clinical success at last follow-up, and relapse were 1.21 (95% CI, 0.68-2.16), 0.84 (95% CI, 0.46-1.52), and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.52-1.70) for fosfomycin vs ertapenem, respectively. Patients treated with fosfomycin had significant reductions in length of hospital stay and length of antimicrobial therapy and fewer adverse events (1 vs 10). Fosfomycin outcomes were similar irrespective of duration of lead-in intravenous (IV) therapy or fosfomycin dosing interval (daily, every other day, every third day). CONCLUSIONS: These results would support the conduct of a randomized controlled trial to verify efficacy. In the meantime, they suggest that fosfomycin may be a reasonable stepdown from IV antibiotics for cUTI.

4.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(4): e213990, 2021 04 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33792728

RESUMO

Importance: To optimize patient outcomes and preserve critical acute care access during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services developed the SAFE @ HOME O2 Expected Practice (expected practice), enabling ambulatory oxygen management for COVID-19. Objective: To assess outcomes of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia discharged via the expected practice approach to home or quarantine housing with supplemental home oxygen. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included 621 adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who were discharged from 2 large urban public hospitals caring primarily for patients receiving Medicaid from March 20 to August 19, 2020. Patients were included in the analysis cohort if they received emergency or inpatient care for COVID-19 and were discharged with home oxygen. Interventions: Patients receiving at least 3 L per minute of oxygen, stable without other indication for inpatient care, were discharged from either emergency or inpatient encounters with home oxygen equipment, educational resources, and nursing telephone follow-up within 12 to 18 hours of discharge. Nurses provided continued telephone follow up as indicated, always with physician back-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality and all-cause 30-day return admission. Results: A total of 621 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia (404 male [65.1%] and 217 female [34.9%]) were discharged with home oxygen. Median age of these patients was 51 years (interquartile range, 45-61 years), with 149 (24.0%) discharged from the emergency department and 472 (76%) discharged from inpatient encounters. The all-cause mortality rate was 1.3% (95% CI, 0.6%-2.5%) and the 30-day return hospital admission rate was 8.5% (95% CI, 6.2%-10.7%) with a median follow-up time of 26 days (interquartile range, 15-55 days). No deaths occurred in the ambulatory setting. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, patients with COVID-19 pneumonia discharged on home oxygen had low rates of mortality and return admission within 30 days of discharge. Ambulatory management of COVID-19 with home oxygen has an acceptable safety profile, and the expected practice approach may help optimize outcomes, by ensuring right care in the right place at the right time and preserving access to acute care during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Assuntos
COVID-19/mortalidade , COVID-19/terapia , Serviços de Assistência Domiciliar , Oxigênio/uso terapêutico , Pandemias , Alta do Paciente , Readmissão do Paciente , Assistência Ambulatorial , Cuidados Críticos , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Feminino , Alocação de Recursos para a Atenção à Saúde , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Oxigenoterapia , Quarentena , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA