Positive Impact of an Aortic Center Designation.

BACKGROUND: In January 2015, we created a multidisciplinary Aortic Center with the collaboration of Vascular Surgery, Cardiac Surgery, Interventional Radiology, Anesthesia and Hospital Administration. We report the initial success of creating a Comprehensive Aortic Center. METHODS: All aortic procedures performed from January 1, 2015 until December 31, 2016 were entered into a prospectively collected database and compared with available data for 2014. Primary outcomes included the number of all aortic related procedures, transfer acceptance rate, transfer time, and proportion of elective/emergent referrals. RESULTS: The Aortic Center included 5 vascular surgeons, 2 cardiac surgeons, and 2 interventional radiologists. Workflow processes were implemented to streamline patient transfers as well as physician and operating room notification. Total aortic volume increased significantly from 162 to 261 patients. This reflected an overall 59% (P = 0.0167) increase in all aorta-related procedures. We had a 65% overall increase in transfer requests with 156% increase in acceptance of referrals and 136% drop in transfer denials (P < 0.0001). Emergent abdominal aortic cases accounted for 17% (n = 45) of our total aortic volume in 2015. The average transfer time from request to arrival decreased from 515 to 352 min, although this change was not statistically significant. We did see a significant increase in the use of air-transfers for aortic patients (P = 0.0041). Factorial analysis showed that time for transfer was affected only by air-transfer use, regardless of the year the patient was transferred. Transfer volume and volume of aortic related procedures remained stable in 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Designation as a comprehensive Aortic Center with implementation of strategic workflow systems and a culture of "no refusal of transfers" resulted in a significant increase in aortic volume for both emergent and elective aortic cases. Case volumes increased for all specialties involved in the center. Improvements in transfer center and emergency medical services communication demonstrated a trend toward more efficient transfer times. These increases and improvements were sustainable for 2 years after this designation.

Clinical examination of pregnant women by paramedical and medical personnel: an assessment of consistency of findings in a field study.

BACKGROUND: As a part of a project to improve the maternal and child health services in 4 primary health centres (PHCs) in Bellary and Raichur districts of Karnataka, we assessed the consistency in recording symptoms, signs and some clinical observations of pregnant women by three examiners-the junior health assistant, medical officer of the PHC and a private medical practitioner. METHODS: One hundred seventy-four pregnant women were examined independently by the three examiners on the same day for 4 symptoms reported by the women themselves, 4 signs assessed by the examining person and 9 simple clinical observations. Agreement rates in each examiner pair for each parameter were assessed. RESULTS: We found poor rates of agreement in assesment of various parameters by each observer pair. The disagreement rates were lower between the two doctors compared with those between the junior health assistant and each doctor. CONCLUSION: The agreement rates between various healthcare personnel in assessing pregnant women are low. There is a need for measures to correct this situation.

[Development of a guideline for rehabilitation of patients with low back pain-- phase 2: analysis of data of the classification of therapeutic procedures]. / Leitlinienentwicklung in der Rehabilitation bei Rückenschmerzpatienten--Phase 2: Ergebnisse einer Analyse von KTL-Daten.

Initiated by the Federal Insurance Institute for Salaried Employees (BfA, Bundesversicherungsanstalt für Angestellte), the project is aimed at developing an evidence-based guideline for rehabilitation of patients with low back pain (LBP). Guideline development will be based on a systematic review of the literature, an analysis of the treatment procedures currently employed in rehabilitation, inclusion of the patients' perspectives as well as consultation of experts' panels of clinically experienced physicians and therapists. Formulation of the guideline will then be carried out in a structured consensus building process. This article is focused on analysing the present situation with regard to the treatments received by patients insured by the BfA, using data from routine documentation according to the Classification of Therapeutic Procedures (KTL, Klassifikation Therapeutischer Leistungen). The analysis is intended to provide indications of a basic need to implement a common guideline as well as, simultaneously, to explore possible deficits in present treatment practices, hence to define priorities requiring special attention in the framework of guideline development. As a result of a systematic literature review, the KTL-defined therapeutic procedures that had emerged as relevant in the rehabilitation of LBP patients were aggregated into so-called therapeutic modules which then formed the basis of the analysis. In all, more than 46,000 KTL-data of 2438 patients with a diagnosis of "low back pain" (M54.5 ICD-10) were included. In the rehab centres investigated, rehabilitation of patients with LBP follows a multidimensional, multiprofessional therapeutic strategy. More than 90 % of all patients receive treatments from the modules "medical training therapy", "health education", "physiotherapy", and "physical therapy". Treatments provided to a majority of the patients are massage (78 %), electrotherapy (67 %) as well as psychotherapy (68 %). Women more frequently than men receive therapies belonging to the "psychological treatments" and "occupational therapies" modules; younger patients receive more of the "training therapies", and more often. When treatments are compared across centres, a large variability in the therapeutic procedures provided becomes apparent. This high degree of variability suggests that development and implementation of a common clinical practice guideline for rehabilitation of patients with chronic low back pain should receive priority attention.