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.
J Am Coll Surg ; 231(2): 249-256.e2, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32360959

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Rib fractures are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite the publication of management guidelines and national outcomes benchmarking, there is significant variation in evidence-based (EB) adherence and outcomes. Systems for clinical decision support intervention (CDSI) allow rapid ordering of bundled disease-specific EB treatments. We developed an EB rib fracture protocol and CDSI at our institution. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate implementation and clinical outcomes using this CDSI. STUDY DESIGN: A rib fracture care CDSI was developed, disseminated, and implemented in July 2018. Implementation outcomes were evaluated using the Proctor framework. Adherence was tracked monthly via run charts and acceptance was evaluated on a 7-point Likert scale using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology questionnaire. Propensity score matching was used to compare in-hospital morbidity and mortality in pre-implementation (January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016) vs post-implementation (September 1, 2018 through April 30, 2019) cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 197 patients were eligible for the intervention. Provider CDSI adherence was 83% at 1 month and reached 100% after 7 months. Acceptance of CDSI using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology had a mean Likert score higher than 6 (range 6.1 to 6.8, SD 0.5 to 1.5), indicating high acceptance. A significant reduction in hospital length of stay was found post implementation (incident rate ratio 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.98; p = 0.03) comparing propensity-matched subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The development and use of a CDSI resulted in improved provider delivery of EB practice and was associated with reduced hospital length of stay.


Assuntos
Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas , Fraturas das Costelas/terapia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Protocolos Clínicos , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Feminino , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Pontuação de Propensão , Melhoria de Qualidade/estatística & dados numéricos , Fraturas das Costelas/complicações , Fraturas das Costelas/mortalidade , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf ; 46(4): 185-191, 2020 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31899154

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) are at an increased risk of developing complications from venous thromboembolisms (VTEs [blood clots]). Benchmarking by the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program identified suboptimal use of prophylactic anticoagulation in patients with TBI. We hypothesized that institutional implementation of an anticoagulation protocol would improve clinical outcomes in such patients. METHODS: A new prophylactic anticoagulation protocol that incorporated education, weekly audits, and real-time adherence feedback was implemented in July 2015. The trauma registry identified patients with TBI before (PRE) and after (POST) implementation. Multivariable regression analysis with risk adjustment was used to compare use of prophylactic anticoagulation, VTE events, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 681 patients with TBI (368 PRE, 313 POST) were identified. After implementation of the VTE protocol, more patients received anticoagulation (PRE: 39.4%, POST: 80.5%, p < 0.001), time to initiation was shorter (PRE: 140 hours, POST: 59 hours, p < 0.001), and there were fewer VTE events (PRE: 19 [5.2%], POST: 7 [2.2%], p = 0.047). Multivariable analysis showed that POST patients were more likely to receive anticoagulation (odds ratio [OR] = 10.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.9-16.7, p < 0.001) and less likely to develop VTE (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.1-1.0, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Benchmarking can assist institutions to identity potential clinically relevant areas for quality improvement in real time. Combining education and multifaceted protocol implementation can help organizations to better focus limited quality resources and counteract barriers that have hindered adoption of best practices.


Assuntos
Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas , Tromboembolia Venosa , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas/complicações , Humanos , Melhoria de Qualidade , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA