ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hospital acquired infections (HAIs) are a major driver of morbidity and cost in health systems. Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) require intensive surveillance and review. All-cause hospital-onset bacteremia (HOB) may be a simpler reporting metric, correlates with CLABSI, and is viewed positively by HAI experts. Despite the ease in the collection, the proportion of HOBs that are actionable and preventable is unknown. Moreover, quality improvement strategies targeting it may be more challenging. In this study, we describe the bedside provider-perceived sources of HOB in order to provide insight into this new metric as a target for HAI prevention. METHODS: All cases of HOBs in 2019 from an academic tertiary care hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Information was collected to assess provider-perceived etiology and associated clinical factors (microbiology, severity, mortality, and management). HOB was categorized as preventable or not preventable based on the perceived source from the care team and management decisions. Preventable causes included device-associated bacteremias, pneumonias, surgical complications, and contaminated blood cultures. RESULTS: Of the 392 instances of HOB, 56.0% (n = 220) had episodes that were determined not preventable by providers. Excluding blood culture contaminates, the most common cause of preventable HOB was secondary to CLABSIs (9.9%, n = 39). Of the HOBs that were not preventable, the most common sources were gastrointestinal and abdominal (n = 62), neutropenic translocation (n = 37), and endocarditis (n = 23). Patients with HOB were generally medically complex with an average Charlson comorbidity index of 4.97. This translated into a higher average length of stay (29.23 vs 7.56, P < .001) and higher inpatient mortality (odds ratio 8.3, confidence interval [6.32-10.77]) when compared to admissions without HOB. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of HOBs were not preventable and the HOB metric may be a marker of a sicker patient population making it a less actionable target for quality improvement. Standardization across the patient mix is important if the metric becomes linked to reimbursement. If the HOB metric were to be used in lieu of CLABSI, large tertiary care health systems that house sicker patients may be unfairly financially penalized for caring for more medically complex patients.
Subject(s)
Bacteremia , Catheter-Related Infections , Cross Infection , Humans , Catheter-Related Infections/epidemiology , Catheter-Related Infections/microbiology , Retrospective Studies , Harm Reduction , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/complications , Bacteremia/epidemiology , Bacteremia/etiology , HospitalsABSTRACT
This report investigated physical activity (PA) monitoring preferences and problems among adults with bipolar disorder (BD). Methods: PARC2 study was conducted at the Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic at the University of Pittsburgh. This secondary data analysis assessed three PA monitors; Body Media SW Pro Armband, Actigraph AM-7164, and Pedometer Omron HJ-720IT. PA monitors were worn simultaneously for 1 week. Participants reported preferences and problems (irritating, cumbersome, movement of the activity monitor, technical difficulties, and impaired functioning) encountered with each activity monitor. Results: Approximately 70% of the participants (n = 66) were middle-aged Caucasian women with a diagnosis of BD I and overweight. Sixty-six adults with BD wore all 3 monitors simultaneously. Twelve (18%) participants had no PA monitoring preference, 28 (42%) preferred the armband, 17 (26%) preferred the pedometer and 9 (14%) preferred the Actigraph. Activity monitoring preferences did not statistically differ by age, gender, race, BMI, diagnosis, or depressive and mania symptoms (p > 0.25). Two-thirds of the participants (64%) had at least one problem with at least one activity monitor. As far as problem categories, more than a quarter of participants reported irritation with the Armband (26%, n = 17) and movement of the pedometer (32%, n = 21). No statistically significant association was observed between activity monitoring preferences and problems (p = 0.72). Discussion: Adults with BD were willing to wear activity monitors even though problems were reported. Preference of physical activity monitors, in descending order, was the armband, pedometer, and Actigraph. One fifth of the adults with BD reported no preferences in activity monitors. The activity monitors selected for investigation included the "gold standard" in activity monitoring (Actigraph) worn at the waist as well as a research grade pedometer that is considerably more affordable, provides activity feedback in real-time, and may be a more feasible option for large scale studies.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To use a randomized controlled design to explore the effects of evidence-based medicine (EBM) education on physician assistant (PA) students' EBM knowledge, self-efficacy, and evidence-seeking behavior in a simulated clinical situation and to present a model of EBM competence. METHODS: Sixty-one didactic-year PA students from one Midwestern University (2 sequential cohorts) were randomized to receive the standard PA curriculum plus EBM training (intervention) or the standard PA curriculum only (control). Evidence-based medicine knowledge was measured with a validated Fresno test. Self-efficacy was measured with a validated Likert scale. Clinical application of EBM skills was measured with an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). RESULTS: Evidence-based medicine education led to significant improvements on the Fresno and self-efficacy tests, both within and between groups. On the OSCE, the intervention group performed no better than the control group. Higher Fresno pretest scores were significantly related to decreasing improvements in the posttest scores: R = -0.634. CONCLUSION: Teaching EBM to PA students improved their EBM knowledge and self-efficacy but not their clinical application. Future research should focus on enhancing EBM evaluation and application in the clinical setting.