Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Ann Emerg Med ; 83(1): 24-34, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37725025

RESUMEN

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The role of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis among patients receiving emergency department (ED) observation unit care is unclear. We investigated an electronic health record-based clinical decision support tool aimed at increasing pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis use among at-risk patients placed in ED observation units. METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time-series study of an Epic-based best practice advisory implemented in May 2019 at a health care system comprising 2 academic medical centers and 4 community hospitals with dedicated ED observation units. The best practice advisory alerted staff at 24 hours to conduct a risk assessment and linked to a VTE prophylaxis order set. We used an interrupted time series, Bayesian structured time series, and a multivariable mixed-effect regression model to estimate the intervention effect. RESULTS: Prior to the best practice advisory implementation, there were 8,895 ED observation unit patients with a length of stay more than or equal to 24 hours, and 0.9% received pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis. Afterward, there were 12,664 ED observation unit patients with a length of stay more than or equal to 24 hours, and 4.8% received pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis. The interrupted time series and causal impact analysis showed a statistically significant increase in VTE prophylaxis (eg, absolute percent difference 3.8%, 95% confidence interval 3.5 to 4.1). In a multivariable model, only the intervention was significantly associated with receiving VTE prophylaxis (odds ratio 4.56, 95% confidence interval 2.22 to 9.37). CONCLUSION: An electronic health record-based alert helped to prompt staff caring for ED observation unit patients at risk for VTE with prolonged visits to order recommended pharmacologic prophylaxis. The best risk assessment model to use and the true incidence of VTE events in this population are unclear.


Asunto(s)
Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & control , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Teorema de Bayes , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Factores de Riesgo
2.
J Palliat Med ; 22(3): 267-273, 2019 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30418094

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Most seriously ill older adults visit the emergency department (ED) near the end of life, yet no feasible method exists to empower them to formulate their care goals in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To develop an intervention to empower seriously ill older adults to formulate their future care goals in the ED. DESIGN: Prospective intervention development study. SETTING: In a single, urban, academic ED, we refined the prototype intervention with ED clinicians and patient advisors. We tested the intervention for its acceptability in English-speaking patients ≥65 years old with serious illness or patients whose treating ED clinician answered "No" to the "surprise question" ("would not be surprised if died in the next 12 months"). We excluded patients with advance directives or whose treating ED clinician determined the patient to be inappropriate. MEASUREMENTS: Our primary outcome was perceived acceptability of our intervention. Secondary outcomes included perceived main intent and stated attitude toward future care planning. RESULTS: We refined the intervention with 16 mock clinical encounters of ED clinicians and patient advisors. Then, we administered the refined intervention to 23 patients and conducted semistructured interviews afterward. Mean age of patients was 76 years, 65% were women, and 43% of patients had metastatic cancer. Most participants (n = 17) positively assessed our intervention, identified questions for their doctors, and reflected on how they feel about their future care. CONCLUSION: An intervention to empower seriously ill older adults to understand the importance of future care planning in the ED was developed, and they found it acceptable.


Asunto(s)
Planificación Anticipada de Atención , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Objetivos , Autonomía Personal , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Toma de Decisiones , Femenino , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Pronóstico , Estudios Prospectivos
3.
J Pain Symptom Manage ; 56(6): 878-885, 2018 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30223014

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Emergency department (ED) visits provide opportunities to empower patients to discuss advance care planning with their outpatient clinicians, but systematically developed, feasible interventions do not currently exist. Brief negotiated interview (BNI) interventions, which allow ED clinicians to efficiently motivate patients, have potential to meet this need. OBJECTIVES: We developed a BNI ED intervention to empower older adults with life-limiting illness to formulate and communicate medical care goals to their primary outpatient clinicians. This study assessed the fidelity and feasibility of this intervention in a high-volume ED. METHODS: We enrolled adult patients with serious illnesses (advanced cancer, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease on dialysis, predicted survival <12 months) in an urban, tertiary care academic medical center ED. All participants received the BNI intervention. We video-recorded the encounters. Two reviewers assessed the recordings for intervention fidelity based on adherence to the BNI steps (Part I) and communication skills (Part II). RESULTS: We reviewed 46 video recordings. The mean total adherence score was 21.07/27 (SD 3.68) or 78.04%. The Part I mean adherence score was 12.07/15 (SD 2.07) or 80.47%. The Part II mean adherence score was 9.0/12 (SD 2.51) or 75%. The majority (75.6%) of recordings met the prespecified threshold for high intervention fidelity. CONCLUSION: ED clinicians can deliver a BNI intervention to increase advance care planning conversations with high fidelity. Future research is needed to study the intervention's efficacy in a wider patient population.


Asunto(s)
Planificación Anticipada de Atención , Enfermedad Crítica , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/métodos , Participación del Paciente/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Atención Ambulatoria/métodos , Enfermedad Crítica/psicología , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Comunicación en Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cooperación del Paciente , Participación del Paciente/psicología , Médicos de Atención Primaria , Proyectos Piloto , Atención Primaria de Salud/métodos , Grabación en Video
4.
Acad Emerg Med ; 24(1): 83-91, 2017 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27611638

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Society of Clinical Oncology recommend risk stratification of patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) and discharge with oral antibiotics for low-risk patients. We studied guideline concordance and clinical outcomes of FN management in our emergency department (ED). METHODS: Our urban, tertiary care teaching hospital provides all emergency and inpatient services to a large comprehensive cancer center. We performed a structured chart review of all FN patients seen in our ED from January 2010 to December 2014. Using electronic medical records, we identified all visits by patients with fever and an absolute neutrophil count of <1000 cells/mm3 and then included only patients without a clear source of infection. Following national guidelines, we classified patients as low or high risk and assessed guideline concordance in disposition and parenteral versus oral antibiotic therapy by risk category as our main outcome measure. RESULTS: Of 173 qualifying visits, we classified 44 (25%) as low risk and 129 (75%) as high risk. Management was guideline concordant in 121 (70%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 63% to 77%). Management was guideline discordant in 43 (98%, 95% CI = 88% to 100%) of low-risk patients versus 9 (7%, 95% CI = 3% to 13%) of high-risk patients (relative risk [RR] = 14, 95% CI = 7.5 to 26). Of 52 guideline-discordant cases, 36 (83%, 95% CI = 72% to 93%) involved low-risk cases with treatment that was more aggressive than recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline concordance was low among low-risk patients, with management tending to be more aggressive than recommended. Unless data emerge that undermine the guidelines, we believe that many of these hospitalizations and parenteral antibiotic regimens can be avoided, decreasing the risks associated with hospitalization, while improving antibiotic stewardship and patient comfort.


Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/normas , Neutropenia Febril/terapia , Adhesión a Directriz/estadística & datos numéricos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Anciano , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Neutropenia Febril/clasificación , Neutropenia Febril/complicaciones , Femenino , Fiebre/tratamiento farmacológico , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA