Comparison of outcomes between patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus who received a primary versus a salvage shunt.

Placement of a ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt is the treatment of choice for communicating hydrocephalus; however, the extent to which VP shunting is able to relieve symptoms in patients who had previously been treated with cerebrospinal fluid diverting therapy at an outside institution remains unclear. A retrospective review of patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus treated with VP shunts at a single institution between 1993 and 2013 was conducted. Patients were classified as having received a primary VP shunt if they had not been previously treated with a VP shunt, ventriculoatrial shunt, lumboperitoneal shunt, or endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Patients were classified as having received a salvage VP shunt if they had been previously treated by one of these four modalities at an outside institution prior to their presentation to our institution. There were 357 patients who received a primary shunt and 33 patients who received a salvage shunt. Patients who had a salvage shunt placed had significantly higher odds of requiring a future revision (54% versus 41%; odds ratio=2.85; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.24-6.57; p=0.014). Patients who received a salvage shunt had statistically significantly lower rates of gait improvement at 6months in comparison to patients who received a primary shunt (relative risk=0.35; 95% CI: 0.14-0.87; p=0.025). Despite these findings, there was no significant difference at last follow-up in improvement in gait, continence, and cognition, indicating that outcomes for patients requiring a salvage shunt were comparable to patients receiving a primary shunt.

Predictors of Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt Revision in Patients with Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have focused on predictive factors of ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt revision in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH). This study aims to determine whether comorbidities and baseline symptoms are associated with the need for shunt revision. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with iNPH treated with VP shunts by the senior author from 1993 to 2013 was conducted. Demographics and baseline symptoms were compared between patients with and without shunt revision. The need for revision, total number of revisions, and time to first revision were examined. Statistical analysis was performed using simple logistic, linear, and Poisson regression, and a multivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 347 patients with iNPH who received VP shunts were included. One hundred patients (28.8%) required shunt revision, with an average of 1.38 ± 0.76 revisions per patient. Mean time to revision was 19.2 ± 31.7 months. Gait and cognitive symptoms were associated with fewer revisions (incidence rate ratio, 0.45 and 0.67; P = 0.03 and 0.004, respectively). Headaches and urinary incontinence showed a greater time to revision (32.0 and 12.0 months; P = 0.014 and <0.0005, respectively). Gait instability demonstrated decreased time to revision (P < 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative symptoms, such as headaches, gait instability, cognitive decline, and urinary incontinence, were significantly correlated with number of revisions and time to first revision. These factors should be considered during the initial counseling of prognosis for patients with iNPH receiving VP shunts.

Electronic Tracking of Patients in an Outpatient Ophthalmology Clinic to Improve Efficient Flow: A Feasibility Analysis and Benchmarking Study.

INTRODUCTION: Real-time location systems (RTLS) and Lean management approaches have been employed to improve patient flow in clinical settings. This study explored the feasibility of using these methodologies in an outpatient resident ophthalmology clinic. METHODS: Patients, providers, and staff in Wilmer Eye Institute General Eye Services Clinic were provided RTLS tags to track their movement throughout the clinic after observational studies modeling flow were conducted. Tracking data guided changes for clinic processes based on Lean management approaches, including reorganization of the reception desk, consolidation of forms, creation of task sheets to improve communication, installation of door flags on examination rooms, and training the staff in service excellence. Tracking was repeated after changes were implemented. A patient satisfaction survey was also conducted prior to and after the changes. RESULTS: After intervention, significant increases were measured in the average time patients spent in the clinic (99.3 minutes vs 112.8 minutes). Significant decreases were seen in the times patients spent with the optometrists (15.4 minutes vs 12.1 minutes), testing (24.7 minutes vs 23.0 minutes), and together with both the attending and the resident (8.3 minutes vs 5.8 minutes). The patient satisfaction survey indicated improvements in patients' perception of the helpfulness/friendliness of the staff, the length of time patients perceived they waited, and overall clinic experience. DISCUSSION: Both RTLS and Lean management approaches may be feasible ways to track and improve patient flow and satisfaction if certain limitations can be overcome. This is the first published report describing these approaches applied to an academic ophthalmology clinic in the United States.