Implementation evaluation of tiered tele-triage pathways for burn center consultations and transfers.

BACKGROUND: Early transfer to specialized centers improves trauma and burn outcomes; however, overtriage can result in unnecessary burdens to patients, providers, and health systems. Our institution developed novel burn triage pathways in 2016 to improve resource allocation. We evaluated the implementation of these pathways, analyzing trends in adoption, resource optimization, and pathway reliability after implementation. METHODS: Triage pathways consist of transfer nurses (RNs) triaging calls based on review of burn images and clinical history: green pathway for direct outpatient referral, blue pathway for discussion with the on-call provider, red pathway for confirmation of transfer as requested by referring provider, and black pathway for the rapid transfer of severe burns. We used the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework to evaluate implementation. These pathways affected all acute burn referrals to our center from January 2017 to December 2019 (reach). Outcomes of interest were pathway assignment over time (adoption), changes to burn provider call volume (effectiveness), and the concordance of pathway assignment with final disposition (implementation reliability). RESULTS: Transfer RNs triaged 5,272 burn referrals between 2017 and 2019. By January 2018, >98% of referrals were assigned a pathway. In 2018-2019, green pathway calls triaged by RNs reduced calls to burn providers by a mean of 40 (SD, 11) per month. Patients in green/blue pathways were less likely to be transferred, with >85% receiving only outpatient follow-up ( p < 0.001). Use of the lower acuity pathways increased over time, with a concordant decrease in use of the higher acuity pathways. Younger adults, patients referred from Level III to Level V trauma centers and nontrauma hospitals, and patients referred by APPs were less likely to be triaged to higher acuity pathways. CONCLUSION: Implementation of highly adopted, reliable triage pathways can optimize existing clinical resources by task-shifting triage of lower acuity burns to nursing teams. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Development and validation of a claims-based algorithm to identify patients with Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum disorder.

INTRODUCTION: No validated algorithm exists to identify patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) in healthcare claims data. We developed and tested the performance of a healthcare claims-based algorithm to identify patients with NMOSD. METHODS: Using medical record data of 101 adults with NMOSD, multiple sclerosis (MS), or myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (MOGAD), we tested the sensitivity and specificity of claims-based algorithms developed through interviews with neurologists. We tested the best-performing algorithm's face validity using 2016-2019 data from IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases. Demographics and clinical characteristics were reported. RESULTS: Algorithm inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years and (≥1 NMO diagnosis [or ≥ 1 transverse myelitis (TM) and ≥ 1 optic neuritis (ON) diagnosis] and ≥ 1 NMOSD drug) or (≥2 NMO diagnoses ≥90 days apart). Exclusion criteria were MS diagnosis or use of MS-specific drug after last NMO diagnosis or NMOSD drug; sarcoidosis diagnosis after last NMO diagnosis; or use of ≥1 immune checkpoint inhibitor. In medical record billing data of 50 patients with NMOSD, 30 with MS, and 21 with MOGAD, the algorithm had 82.0% sensitivity and 70.6% specificity. When applied to healthcare claims data, demographic and clinical features of the identified cohort were similar to known demographics of NMOSD. CONCLUSIONS: This clinically derived algorithm performed well in medical records. When tested in healthcare claims, demographics and clinical characteristics were consistent with previous clinical findings. This algorithm will enable a more accurate estimation of NMOSD disease burden using insurance claims datasets.

Modified Delphi panel consensus recommendations for management of severe aplastic anemia.

ABSTRACT: Severe aplastic anemia (SAA) is a rare hematologic condition for which there is no clear management algorithm. A panel of 11 experts on adult and pediatric aplastic anemia was assembled and, using the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles modified Delphi panel method, evaluated >600 varying patient care scenarios to develop clinical recommendations for the initial and subsequent management of patients of all ages with SAA. Here, we present the panel's recommendations to rule out inherited bone marrow failure syndromes, on supportive care before and during first-line therapy, and on first-line (initial management) and second-line (subsequent management) therapy of acquired SAA, focusing on when transplant vs medical therapy is most appropriate. These recommendations represent the consensus of 11 experts informed by published literature and experience. They are intended only as general guidance for experienced clinicians who treat patients with SAA and are in no way intended to supersede individual physician and patient decision making. Current and future research should validate this consensus using clinical data. Once validated, we hope these expert panel recommendations will improve outcomes for patients with SAA.