Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ; 22(1): 339, 2022 12 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36550466

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Assessment and feedback is a common implementation strategy to improve healthcare provider fidelity to clinical guidelines. For immunization guidelines, fidelity is often measured with doses administered during eligible visits. Adding a patient refusal measure captures provider fidelity more completely (i.e., all instances of a provider recommending a vaccine, resulting in vaccination or refusal) and enables providers to track patient vaccine hesitancy patterns. However, many electronic health record (EHR) systems have no structured field to document multiple instances of refusals for specific vaccines, and existing billing codes for refusal are not vaccine specific. This study assessed the feasibility of a novel method for refusal documentation used in a study focused on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. METHODS: An observational, descriptive-comparative, mixed-methods study design was used to conduct secondary data analysis from an implementation-effectiveness trial. The parent trial compared coach-based versus web-based practice facilitation, including assessment and feedback, to increase HPV vaccination in 21 community-based private pediatric practices. Providers were instructed to document initial HPV vaccine refusals in the EHR's immunization forms and subsequent refusals using dummy procedure codes, for use in assessment and feedback reports. This analysis examined adoption and maintenance of the refusal documentation method during eligible well visits, identified barriers and facilitators to documentation and described demographic patterns in patient refusals. RESULTS: Seven practices adopted the refusal documentation method. Among adopter practices, documented refusals started at 2.4% of eligible well visits at baseline, increased to 14.2% at the start of implementation, peaked at 24.0%, then declined to 18.8%. Barriers to refusal documentation included low prioritization, workflow integration and complication of the billing process. Facilitators included high motivation, documentation instructions and coach support. Among adopter practices, odds of refusing HPV vaccine were 25% higher for patients aged 15-17 years versus 11-12 years, and 18% lower for males versus females. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the value of patient refusal documentation for measuring HPV vaccination guideline fidelity and ways that it can be improved in future research. Creation of vaccine-specific refusal billing codes or EHR adaptations to enable documenting multiple instances of specific vaccine refusals would facilitate consistent refusal documentation. Trial Registration NCT03399396 Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on 1/16/2018.


Assuntos
Infecções por Papillomavirus , Vacinas contra Papillomavirus , Masculino , Feminino , Humanos , Criança , Papillomavirus Humano , Infecções por Papillomavirus/prevenção & controle , Estudos de Viabilidade , Vacinação , Imunização
2.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(12): 1894-1900, 2022 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35098913

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To improve appropriate antibiotic prescribing for children in Tennessee. DESIGN: We performed a before-and-after intervention study with 3 comparison periods: period 1 (P1, baseline) May 2018-September 2019; period 2 (P2, intervention before the COVID-19 pandemic) November 11, 2019-March 20, 2020; and period 3 (P3, intervention during the coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] pandemic) March 21, 2020-November 10, 2020. We additionally surveyed participating providers to assess acceptance of the intervention. SETTING: Community general pediatrics practices. PARTICIPANTS: In total, 81 general pediatricians, family medicine physicians, and nurse practitioners in 5 general pediatrics practices participated in this study. INTERVENTIONS: Each practice identified a practice and operations champion for the project. Practices chose 2-4 implementation strategies previously shown to be effective at reducing outpatient antibiotic use to implement in their practice throughout the study intervention period. Study personnel also held quarterly meetings with all providers to review deidentified peer comparison feedback both across practices enrolled in the study and at the provider level within each practice. RESULTS: We detected improvements in guideline-concordant antibiotic use in the pre-COVID-19 intervention period, and they were sustained in the study period during the pandemic (P3): otitis media (P1 72.14% vs P2 81.42% vs P3 86.11%), group A streptococcal pharyngitis (P1 66.13% vs P2 81.56% vs P3 80.44%), pneumonia (P1 70.6% vs P2 76.2% vs P3 100%), sinusitis (P1 76.2% vs P2 83.78% vs P3 82.86%), skin and soft-tissue infections (P1 97.18% vs P2 100% vs P3 100%). CONCLUSIONS: Bundled implementation strategies led to significant increases in guideline-concordant antibiotic prescribing for all diagnoses. Survey results demonstrate that the bundled implementation strategies were well-accepted by providers.


Assuntos
Gestão de Antimicrobianos , COVID-19 , Pediatria , Criança , Humanos , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Pandemias , Padrões de Prática Médica , Prescrição Inadequada
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...