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

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Popul Health Manag ; 23(6): 430-437, 2020 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31816257

RESUMO

Frequent emergency department (ED) utilization is an indicator of unmet health and social needs, especially among patients with mental and physical health problems. The authors aimed to characterize frequent ED utilizers and drivers of multiple ED use, including presence of serious mental illness (SMI), across 2 large health care systems in Northern California. Using electronic health records and a data-sharing platform, a cross-sectional analysis was conducted of patients aged 18+ years with ≥10 ED visits in 2016. Logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with multiple ED use versus single ED use. Among the 8036 patients who met inclusion criteria, the mean age was 55.9 years (95% CI = 55.5-56.4), 53% were female, 54% were non-Hispanic white, and 38% had any SMI. Overall, 51% of patients were single ED utilizers. Patients ages ≥65 years were less likely to use multiple EDs compared to younger patients (ages 18-23) (OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.2-0.4). African Americans exhibited more than 3 times the likelihood of multi-ED use compared to non-Hispanic whites (OR = 3.8, 95% CI = 3.3-4.3). A diagnosis of any SMI (OR = 2.3 [95% CI: 2.1-2.6]), major depressive disorder (OR = 1.3, 95% CI = 1.1-1.4), schizophrenia (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.6-2.6), or suicidal attempts/ideation (OR = 2.7, 95% CI = 2.1-3.6) was significantly associated with increased likelihood of multi-ED use. Findings indicate heterogeneity in regional utilization patterns among frequent ED utilizers, with mental illness increasing the likelihood of multi-ED use.


Assuntos
Transtorno Depressivo Maior , Transtornos Mentais , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos Transversais , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Transtornos Mentais/epidemiologia , Transtornos Mentais/terapia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem
2.
JBJS Rev ; 6(5): e4, 2018 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29738408

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Evidence is limited regarding the complications and outcomes after medial ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction. The published data regarding this procedure are composed predominantly of small Level-III and IV retrospective studies for which meta-analysis is not generally useful. Meta-regression is an alternative technique to identify variables across multiple publications that have an effect on published outcomes and complication rates. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of published literature for outcomes after UCL reconstruction. A random effects meta-regression model was constructed to identify the association of study characteristics with outcome proportions. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of influential studies on the results. RESULTS: Fourteen studies (median sample size, 26 patients; range, 10 to 743 patients) were included in the systematic review and meta-regression. These studies included a total of 1,177 patients with a reported Conway outcome rating (a measure of a patient's return to play). The majority of patients (mean, 83.2%) achieved an excellent Conway rating. Studies involving the docking technique were more likely to have a higher percentage of patients with an excellent outcome (14% risk difference compared with the figure-of-8 technique, p = 0.002) and lower reported rates of ulnar neurapraxia (Spearman correlation = -0.83). A lower reported rate of ulnar neurapraxia was strongly associated with the likelihood of an excellent (p = 0.01) or good or excellent (p = 0.001) Conway outcome rating. CONCLUSIONS: Despite substantial heterogeneity among study outcomes, studies that involved a docking technique and that had lower reported rates of ulnar neurapraxia were associated with greater percentages of excellent or good-to-excellent reported Conway outcome ratings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Assuntos
Traumatismos em Atletas/cirurgia , Ligamentos Colaterais/cirurgia , Articulação do Cotovelo/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/fisiopatologia , Reconstrução do Ligamento Colateral Ulnar , Neuropatias Ulnares/fisiopatologia , Traumatismos em Atletas/fisiopatologia , Traumatismos em Atletas/reabilitação , Fenômenos Biomecânicos , Ligamentos Colaterais/lesões , Articulação do Cotovelo/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/reabilitação , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Neuropatias Ulnares/etiologia , Neuropatias Ulnares/reabilitação , Lesões no Cotovelo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA