Beyond "Asian": Specific East and Southeast Asian Races or Ethnicities Associated With Jaundice Readmission.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines have recognized "Asian" and "East Asian" as risk factors for newborn jaundice and readmission. We sought to identify more detailed and specific, parent-identified races or ethnicities associated with jaundice readmission. METHODS: We conducted a case control study of 653 newborn infants born (2014-2016) at a West-Coast, urban hospital to examine specific parent-described races or ethnicities that are associated with newborn hospital readmissions for hyperbilirubinemia. Parent-reported race or ethnicity was abstracted from the California Newborn Screening Test. RESULTS: Our sample included 105 infants readmitted for jaundice (cases) and 548 infants as controls. In the full cohort, 66 infants (10.1%) were Coombs positive, 39 infants (6.0%) were born before 37 weeks' gestational age, and 405 infants (62.0%) were born to first-time mothers. The parents described the 653 infants using 45 unique races and ethnicities. In a multivariable model that controlled for Coombs positivity, gestational age <37 weeks, and primiparity, infants described as "Far East Asian" (odds ratio [OR] = 3.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.94-5.18) or "Southeast Asian" (OR = 3.17; 95% CI = 1.66-6.08) had increased risk for jaundice readmission. Infants described as Southeast Asian (eg, Laotian, Cambodian, Indonesian, Vietnamese, and Filipino) and Far East Asian (eg, Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese, Japanese, and Mongolian) had an increased risk of readmission. Finally, we did not find an association between South Asian (OR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.33-1.92) race or ethnicity and risk of jaundice readmission. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we help clarify and move beyond the term "Asian" as a risk factor for readmission due to hyperbilirubinemia.

Findings from a clinical audit in regional general practice of management of patients following acute coronary syndrome.

Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) require ongoing treatment and support from their primary care provider to modify cardiovascular risk factors (including diet, exercise and mood), to receive evidence-based pharmacotherapies and be properly monitored and to ensure their take-up and completion of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). This study assesses adherence to National Heart Foundation guidelines for ACS in primary care in a regional centre in Western Australia. Patients discharged from hospital after a coronary event (unstable angina or myocardial infarction) or a coronary procedure (stent or coronary artery bypass graft) were identified through general practice electronic medical records. Patient data was extracted using a data form based on National Heart Foundation guidelines. Summary statistics were calculated and reported. Our study included 22 GPs and 44 patients in a regional centre. In total, 90% (n=39) of discharge summaries recorded medications. Assessment of pharmacological management showed that 53% (n=23) of patients received four or more classes of pharmacotherapy and that GPs often augmented medication beyond that prescribed at discharge. Of 15 smokers, 13 (87%) had advice to quit documented. Minimal advice for other risk-factor modification was documented in care plans. Patients with type 2 diabetes (n=20) were 70% more likely to receive allied health referral (P=0.02) and 60% more likely to receive advice regarding diet and exercise (P=0.007). However, overall, only 30% (n=13) of those eligible were referred to a dietician, and only 25% were referred to CR (n=10) with six completing CR. Although most GPs did not use standardised tools for mood assessment, 18 (41%) patients were diagnosed as depressed, of which 88% (n=16) were started on antidepressants and 28% (n=6) were referred to a psychologist. Although pharmacotherapy, mood management and smoking cessation management generally followed recommended guidelines, risk factor management relating to diet and exercise by GPs require improvement. Detailed care plans and referral to CR and allied health staff for patient support is recommended.

Evidence-based interventions in primary care following acute coronary syndrome in Australia and New Zealand: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease has a significant disease burden, but there are many known barriers to management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). General practitioners (GPs) bear considerable responsibility for post-discharge management of ACS in Australia and New Zealand (NZ), but knowledge about the extent and efficacy of such management is limited. This systematic review summarises published evidence from Australia and New Zealand regarding management in primary care after discharge following ACS. METHODS: A search of PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL-Plus and PSYCINFO databases in August 2015 was supplemented by citation screening and hand-searching. Literature was selected based on specified criteria, and assessed for quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Extracted data was related to evidence-based interventions specified by published guidelines. RESULTS: The search yielded 19 publications, most of which reported on quantitative and observational studies from Australia. The majority of studies scored at least 75 % on the MMAT. Diverse aspects of management by GPs are presented according to categories of evidence-based guidelines. Data suggests that GPs are more likely to prescribe ACS medications than to assist in lifestyle or psychological management. GP referral to cardiac rehabilitation varied, and one study showed an improvement in the number of ACS patients with documented ACS management plans. Few studies described successful interventions to improve GP management, though some quality improvement efforts through education and integration of care with hospitals were beneficial. Limited data was published about interventions effective in rural, minority, and Indigenous populations. CONCLUSIONS: Research reflects room for improvement in GP post-discharge ACS management, but little is known about effective methods for improvement. Additional research, both observational and interventional, would assist GPs in improving the quality of post-discharge ACS care.