Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 8(18): e012656, 2019 09 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31510841

RESUMEN

Background Variability in the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the emergency department (ED) leads to avoidable hospital admissions and prolonged length of stay (LOS). In a retrospective single-center study, a multidisciplinary AF treatment pathway was associated with a reduced hospital admission rate and reduced LOS. To assess the applicability of the AF pathway across institutions, we conducted a 2-center study. Methods and Results We performed a prospective, 2-stage study at 2 tertiary care hospitals. During the first stage, AF patients in the ED received routine care. During the second stage, AF patients received care according to the AF pathway. The primary study outcome was hospital admission rate. Secondary outcomes included ED LOS and inpatient LOS. We enrolled 104 consecutive patients in each stage. Patients treated using the AF pathway were admitted to the hospital less frequently than patients who received routine care (15% versus 55%; P<0.001). For admitted patients, average hospital LOS was shorter in the AF pathway cohort than in the routine care cohort (64 versus 105 hours, respectively; P=0.01). There was no significant difference in the average ED LOS between AF pathway and routine care cohorts (14 versus 12 hours, respectively; P=0.32). Conclusions In this prospective 2-stage, 2-center study, utilization of a multidisciplinary AF treatment pathway resulted in a 3.7-fold reduction in admission rate and a 1.6-fold reduction in average hospital LOS for admitted patients. Utilization of the AF pathway was not associated with a significant change in ED LOS.


Asunto(s)
Antiarrítmicos/uso terapéutico , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Fibrilación Atrial/terapia , Cardioversión Eléctrica , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Atención Ambulatoria , Fibrilación Atrial/complicaciones , Cardiología , Vías Clínicas , Medicina de Emergencia , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Inhibidores del Factor Xa/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Alta del Paciente , Estudios Prospectivos , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Warfarina/uso terapéutico
2.
Curr Med Res Opin ; 33(9): 1697-1703, 2017 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28665208

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In the EINSTEIN-Pulmonary Embolism (PE) trial, subjects randomized to rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin bridging to vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy experienced a reduced index hospital length of stay (LOS). We sought to conduct a systematic review of real-world studies comparing LOS, costs and early outcomes among patients treated with rivaroxaban or parenterally bridged VKA in routine practice. METHODS: We searched Medline and Scopus from 1 January 2011 to 30 November 2016 to identify observational studies comparing acute PE patients anticoagulated with rivaroxaban or parenterally bridged VKA and reporting data on index hospital LOS, costs and/or early post-PE outcomes. Studies not using appropriate methods for minimizing confounding bias or not published in English were excluded. RESULTS: Five studies met inclusion criteria. Rivaroxaban use was associated with decreased index hospital LOS (range: 1.36-1.70 days) and treatment costs (range: $1818-$2688) during an index stay compared to parenterally bridged warfarin. No differences in early readmission for recurrent thrombosis were noted between anticoagulation strategies. Readmission for major bleeding was rare in both cohorts. Similar reductions in LOS (range: 0.23-4.3 days) and costs (range: $251-$7094) were observed with rivaroxaban in studies restricted to patients deemed low risk for early complications by clinical gestalt or by a clinical- or claims-based risk stratification tool. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of patient predicted risk of post-PE complications, real-world studies suggest that rivaroxaban is associated with a reduced hospital LOS and costs versus parenterally bridged warfarin, without increasing readmission.


Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Embolia Pulmonar/tratamiento farmacológico , Rivaroxabán/uso terapéutico , Enoxaparina/uso terapéutico , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Warfarina/uso terapéutico
3.
Int J Clin Pract ; 71(1)2017 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28097761

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Unlike rivaroxaban, treatment of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) with warfarin requires parenteral bridging and coagulation monitoring that may prolong length-of-stay (LOS) and increase hospital costs. AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare LOS, hospital costs and readmissions in PE patients managed through observation stays treated with rivaroxaban or parenterally bridged warfarin. METHODS: Premier Hospital claims data from November 2012 to March 2015 were used to identify patients with a primary diagnosis code for PE managed through an observation stay and with ≥1 claim for a PE-related diagnostic test on day 0-2. Rivaroxaban users, allowing ≤2 days of prior parenteral therapy, were 1:1 propensity-score matched to patients receiving parenterally bridged warfarin. LOS, the proportion of encounters lasting >2 midnights, total hospital costs of the index visit and risk of readmission for venous thromboembolism (VTE) or major bleeding during the same month or 2 months subsequent to the index event were compared between matched cohorts using multivariable regression. RESULTS: A total of 312 rivaroxaban users were matched to 312 patients receiving parenterally bridged warfarin. Rivaroxaban was associated with an average of 0.27-day shorter LOS, a 52% decreased odds of an encounter lasting >2 midnights and a $403 mean reduction in costs vs parenterally bridged warfarin (P≤.002 for all). The readmission rate for VTE during the same or subsequent 2 months following the index PE was similar between cohorts (P=.75). No patient in either cohort was readmitted for major bleeding. CONCLUSION: Rivaroxaban was associated with shortened LOS and lowered cost vs parenterally bridged warfarin in PE observation stay patients, without increases in the short-term rate of complications or readmission.


Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Costos de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Embolia Pulmonar/terapia , Rivaroxabán/uso terapéutico , Warfarina/uso terapéutico , Reclamos Administrativos en el Cuidado de la Salud , Adulto , Anciano , Anticoagulantes/economía , Femenino , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Observación , Puntaje de Propensión , Rivaroxabán/administración & dosificación , Rivaroxabán/economía , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & control , Warfarina/economía
4.
Acad Emerg Med ; 24(1): 83-91, 2017 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27611638

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Society of Clinical Oncology recommend risk stratification of patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) and discharge with oral antibiotics for low-risk patients. We studied guideline concordance and clinical outcomes of FN management in our emergency department (ED). METHODS: Our urban, tertiary care teaching hospital provides all emergency and inpatient services to a large comprehensive cancer center. We performed a structured chart review of all FN patients seen in our ED from January 2010 to December 2014. Using electronic medical records, we identified all visits by patients with fever and an absolute neutrophil count of <1000 cells/mm3 and then included only patients without a clear source of infection. Following national guidelines, we classified patients as low or high risk and assessed guideline concordance in disposition and parenteral versus oral antibiotic therapy by risk category as our main outcome measure. RESULTS: Of 173 qualifying visits, we classified 44 (25%) as low risk and 129 (75%) as high risk. Management was guideline concordant in 121 (70%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 63% to 77%). Management was guideline discordant in 43 (98%, 95% CI = 88% to 100%) of low-risk patients versus 9 (7%, 95% CI = 3% to 13%) of high-risk patients (relative risk [RR] = 14, 95% CI = 7.5 to 26). Of 52 guideline-discordant cases, 36 (83%, 95% CI = 72% to 93%) involved low-risk cases with treatment that was more aggressive than recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline concordance was low among low-risk patients, with management tending to be more aggressive than recommended. Unless data emerge that undermine the guidelines, we believe that many of these hospitalizations and parenteral antibiotic regimens can be avoided, decreasing the risks associated with hospitalization, while improving antibiotic stewardship and patient comfort.


Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/normas , Neutropenia Febril/terapia , Adhesión a Directriz/estadística & datos numéricos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Anciano , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Neutropenia Febril/clasificación , Neutropenia Febril/complicaciones , Femenino , Fiebre/tratamiento farmacológico , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo
6.
Acad Emerg Med ; 18(6): e52-63, 2011 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21676050

RESUMEN

The decision to admit a patient to the hospital after an emergency department (ED) visit is expensive, frequently not evidence-based, and variable. Outpatient critical pathways are a promising approach to reduce hospital admission after emergency care. Critical pathways exist to risk stratify patients for potentially serious diagnoses (e.g., acute myocardial infarction [AMI]) or evaluate response to therapy (e.g., community-acquired pneumonia) within a short time period (i.e., less than 36 hours), to determine if further hospital-based acute care is needed. Yet, such pathways are variably used while many patients are admitted for conditions for which they could be treated as outpatients. In this article, the authors propose a model of post-ED critical pathways, describe their role in emergency care, list common diagnoses that are amenable to critical pathways in the outpatient setting, and propose a research agenda to address barriers and solutions to increase the use of outpatient critical pathways. If emergency providers are to routinely conduct rapid evaluations in outpatient or observation settings, they must have several conditions at their disposal: 1) evidence-based tools to accurately risk stratify patients for protocolized care, 2) systems of care that reliably facilitate workup in the outpatient setting, and 3) a medical environment conducive to noninpatient pathways, with aligned risks and incentives among patients, providers, and payers. Increased use of critical pathways after emergency care is a potential way to improve the value of emergency care.


Asunto(s)
Atención Ambulatoria/normas , Vías Clínicas , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Humanos , Admisión del Paciente/normas , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Selección de Paciente , Pronóstico , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Medición de Riesgo/organización & administración
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA