Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
Healthc Q ; 13(3): 72-9, 2010.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20523157

RESUMEN

In an effort to assess and advance the community-based model of chronic care, we reviewed a contemporary spectrum of Canadian chronic disease management and prevention (CDMP) programs with a participatory audience of administrators, academics, professional and non-professional providers and patients. While many questions remain unanswered, several common characteristics of CDMP success were apparent. These included community-based partnerships with aligned goals; inter-professional and non-professional care, including patient self-management; measured and shared information on practices and outcomes; and visible leadership. Principal improvement opportunities identified were the enhanced engagement of all stakeholders; further efficacy evidence for team care; facile information systems, with clear rationales for data selection, access, communication and security; and increased education of, and resource support for, patients and caregivers. Two immediate actions were suggested. One was a broad and continuing communication plan highlighting CDMP issues and opportunities. The other was a standardized survey of team structures, interventions, measurements and communications in ongoing CDMP programs, with a causal analysis of their relation to outcomes. In the longer term, the key needs requiring action were more inter-professional education of health human resources and more practical information systems available to all stakeholders. Things can be better.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crónica/terapia , Servicios de Salud Comunitaria , Canadá , Enfermedad Crónica/prevención & control , Servicios de Salud Comunitaria/organización & administración , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Modelos Organizacionales , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud
2.
Pediatr Phys Ther ; 20(2): 179-84, 2008.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18480718

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: This article reports on the process used to appraise evidence-based physiotherapy practice when treating nonspecific low back pain (LBP) in children and adolescents. METHOD: Best clinical practices were identified using 9 systematic reviews reporting on effectiveness of physiotherapy for individuals with nonspecific LBP. Fifty medical charts were reviewed to appraise practice. RESULTS: All literature reviews reported solely on adult treatment, none included children or adolescents. Strong evidence supported the effectiveness of therapeutic exercises and education. There was insufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of thermotherapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, or ultrasound. Chart reviews indicated therapeutic exercises were prescribed for all 50 pediatric patients and postural education was provided to 48 patients. Eleven patients received thermotherapy, three received transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and none was treated with ultrasound. CONCLUSIONS: Published literature reviews enabled physiotherapists to appraise evidence-based practices. Clinical guidelines for treating nonspecific LBP in children and adolescents are needed.


Asunto(s)
Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/rehabilitación , Manipulaciones Musculoesqueléticas/métodos , Adolescente , Factores de Edad , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
Med Care ; 44(7): 664-70, 2006 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16799361

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this population-based observational cohort study was to estimate the extent to which the inclusion/exclusion of transferred patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) impacts on hospital performance rankings. SUBJECTS: The authors studied 91,633 adult patients admitted to 116 acute care hospitals in Quebec, Canada, with a primary diagnosis of AMI between 1992 and 1999. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Hospital performance ranks, based on 30-day AMI mortality rates, were estimated with hierarchical models and compared using 3 different methods for handling transferred patients (exclude all transfers; include transfers and assign outcome to the referring hospital; include transfers and assign outcome to the receiving hospital). The explanatory variable of interest was the hospital to which the patient's outcome was attributed. RESULTS: Using the 3 methods, 4 hospitals were ranked "best performers" once, and 1 hospital ranked among the best in 2 of the 3 analyses performed. Nine hospitals were ranked "worst performers" at least once (4 of which ranked among the "worst" once only, 2 ranked among the "worst" twice, and 3 were consistently ranked "worst performers" in all analyses). There was significant variation in mortality rates among hospitals, and the difference in the rates between the highest and lowest ranking hospitals exceeded the clinically relevant benchmark of 1%. CONCLUSIONS: Performance evaluation studies that compare hospital mortality rates typically exclude transferred patients. However, methods used to deal with AMI patient transfers influenced hospital ranks when comparing 30-day mortality rates. Excluding transfers may lead to an inaccurate depiction of the quality of healthcare services in regionalized healthcare systems that call for the timely interhospital transfer of patients with AMI.


Asunto(s)
Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Infarto del Miocardio/mortalidad , Transferencia de Pacientes/estadística & datos numéricos , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Anciano , Canadá/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA