Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 543
Filtrar
6.
J Vasc Surg ; 74(2): 599-604.e1, 2021 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33548417

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) is a federal law established in 1986 to ensure that patients who present to an emergency department receive medical care regardless of means. Violations are reported to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and can result in significant financial penalties. Our objective was to assess all available EMTALA violations for vascular-related issues. METHODS: EMTALA violations in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services publicly available hospital violations database from 2011 to 2018 were evaluated for vascular-related issues. Details recorded were case type, hospital type, hospital region, reasons for violation, disposition, and mortality. RESULTS: There were 7001 patients identified with any EMTALA violation and 98 (1.4%) were deemed vascular related. The majority (82.7%) of EMTALA violations occurred at urban/suburban hospitals. Based on the Association of American Medical Colleges United States region, vascular-related EMTALA violations occurred in the Northeast (7.1%), Southern (56.1%), Central (18.4%), and Western (18.4%) United States. Case types included cerebrovascular (28.6%), aortic related (22.4%; which consisted of ruptured aortic aneurysms [8.2%], aortic dissection [11.2%], and other aortic [3.1%]), vascular trauma (15.3%), venous-thromboembolic (15.3%), peripheral arterial disease (9.2%), dialysis access (5.1%), bowel ischemia (3.1%), and other (1%) cases. Patients were transferred to another facility in 41.8% of cases. The most common reasons for violation were specialty refusal or unavailability (30.6%), inappropriate documentation (29.6%), misdiagnosis (18.4%), poor communication (17.3%), inappropriate triage (13.3%), failure to obtain diagnostic laboratory tests or imaging (12.2%), and ancillary or nursing staff issues (7.1%). The overall mortality was 19.4% and 31.6% died during the index emergency department visit. Vascular conditions associated with death were venous thromboembolism (31.6%), ruptured aortic aneurysm (21.1%), aortic dissection (21.1%), other aortic causes (10.5%), vascular trauma (10.5%), and bowel ischemia (5.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Although the frequency of vascular-related EMTALA violations was low, improvements in communication, awareness of vascular disease among staff, specialty staffing, and the development of referral networks and processes are needed to ensure that patients receive adequate care and that institutions are not placed at undue risk.


Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/legislação & jurisprudência , Política de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Padrões de Prática Médica/legislação & jurisprudência , Cirurgiões/legislação & jurisprudência , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Vasculares/legislação & jurisprudência , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./legislação & jurisprudência , Bases de Dados Factuais , Regulamentação Governamental , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Responsabilidade Legal , Imperícia/legislação & jurisprudência , Erros Médicos/legislação & jurisprudência , Segurança do Paciente/legislação & jurisprudência , Transferência de Pacientes/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa do Médico a Tratar/legislação & jurisprudência , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Vasculares/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Vasculares/mortalidade
8.
Neurosurg Focus ; 49(5): E8, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33130613

RESUMO

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) protects patient access to emergency medical treatment regardless of insurance or socioeconomic status. A significant result of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the rapid acceleration in the adoption of telemedicine services across many facets of healthcare. However, very little literature exists regarding the use of telemedicine in the context of EMTALA. This work aimed to evaluate the potential to expand the usage of telemedicine services for neurotrauma to reduce transfer rates, minimize movement of patients across borders, and alleviate the burden on tertiary care hospitals involved in the care of patients with COVID-19 during a global pandemic. In this paper, the authors outline EMTALA provisions, provide examples of EMTALA violations involving neurosurgical care, and propose guidelines for the creation of telemedicine protocols between referring and consulting institutions.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Concussão Encefálica/terapia , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./legislação & jurisprudência , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/legislação & jurisprudência , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Telemedicina/legislação & jurisprudência , Concussão Encefálica/epidemiologia , COVID-19 , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./tendências , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/tendências , Humanos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicina/tendências , Centros de Atenção Terciária/legislação & jurisprudência , Centros de Atenção Terciária/tendências , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
9.
Healthc (Amst) ; 8(3): 100443, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32919582

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: National regulations have increasingly focused on transparency in hospital billing and pricing practices. A January 2019 federal mandate required hospitals to publicize lists of billable procedures and items known as chargemasters. METHODS: We identified the 500 top self-pay/uninsured revenue grossing hospitals nationally and searched each hospital's website for a chargemaster. Corresponding items were matched across chargemasters. Intrahospital and interhospital price variation were calculated. To investigate variation in item naming, a name variant and fuzzy matching search was conducted for fifteen common chargemaster items. RESULTS: Of 500 hospitals in this study, 69 (13.8%) had chargemasters that were inaccessible and 30 (6.0%) had chargemasters that did not meet mandated requirements. Among the remaining 431 hospitals, the mean interhospital and intrahospital variation in pricing for identical items was 18% (SD 28%) and 28% (SD 29%), respectively. 388 hospitals listed multiple prices for the same item, with a mean of 687.3 duplicated items (SD 1157.7). Among fifteen common chargemaster items, each item was associated with an average of 275 (SD 213) unique name variants. Interhospital price variation of these items ranged from 53% (transthoracic echocardiogram) to 243% (furosemide 40 mg). CONCLUSIONS: Many chargemasters have barriers to access, and item naming is inconsistent across chargemasters. There is significant interhospital price variation for similar items. IMPLICATIONS: Chargemasters are uninterpretable for the purpose of patient price comparison in their current form. Further regulatory efforts are necessary to increase price transparency and enhance the ability of patients to compare hospital prices.


Assuntos
Custos e Análise de Custo/normas , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./legislação & jurisprudência , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./organização & administração , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./estatística & dados numéricos , Lógica Fuzzy , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/tendências , Hospitais/normas , Hospitais/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Reembolso Diferenciado/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos
10.
J Hosp Med ; 15(8): 495-497, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32804613

RESUMO

Rarely, if ever, does a national healthcare system experience such rapid and marked change as that seen with the COVID-19 pandemic. In March 2020, the president of the United States declared a national health emergency, enabling the Department of Health & Human Services authority to grant temporary regulatory waivers to facilitate efficient care delivery in a variety of healthcare settings. The statutory requirement that Medicare beneficiaries stay three consecutive inpatient midnights to qualify for post-acute skilled nursing facility coverage is one such waiver. This so-called Three Midnight Rule, dating back to the 1960s as part of the Social Security Act, is being scrutinized more than half a century later given the rise in observation hospital stays. Despite the tragic emergency circumstances prompting waivers, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and Congress now have a unique opportunity to evaluate potential improvements revealed by COVID-19 regulatory relief and should consider permanent reform of the Three Midnight Rule.


Assuntos
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./organização & administração , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Instituições de Cuidados Especializados de Enfermagem/legislação & jurisprudência , Cuidados Semi-Intensivos/legislação & jurisprudência , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./legislação & jurisprudência , Reforma dos Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , Medicare/legislação & jurisprudência , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos
15.
Stroke ; 51(4): 1339-1343, 2020 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32078482

RESUMO

Background and Purpose- Industry payments to physicians raise concerns regarding conflicts of interest that could impact patient care. We explored nonresearch and nonownership payments from industry to vascular neurologists to identify trends in compensation. Methods- Using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology data, we explored financial relationships between industry and US vascular neurologists from 2013 to 2018. We analyzed payment characteristics, including payment categories, payment distribution among physicians, regional trends, and biomedical manufacturers. Furthermore, we analyzed the top 1% (by compensation) of vascular neurologists with detailed payment categories, their position, and their contribution to stroke guidelines. Results- The number of board certified vascular neurologist increased from 1169 in 2013 to 1746 in 2018. The total payments to vascular neurologist increased from $99 749 in 2013 to $1 032 302 in 2018. During the study period, 16% to 17% of vascular neurologists received industry payments. Total payments from industry and mean physician payments increased yearly over this period, with consulting fee (31.1%) and compensation for services other than consulting (30.7%) being the highest paid categories. The top 10 manufacturers made the majority of the payments, and the top 10 products changed from drug or biological products to devices. Physicians from south region of the United States received the highest total payment (38.72%), which steadily increased. Payments to top 1% vascular neurologists increased from 64% to 79% over the period as payments became less evenly distributed. Among the top 1%, 42% specialized in neuro intervention, 11% contributed to American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines, and around 75% were key leaders in the field. Conclusions- A small proportion of US vascular neurologists consistently received the majority of industry payments, the value of which grew over the study period. Only 11% of the top 1% receiving industry payments have authored American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines, but ≈75% seem to be key leaders in the field. Whether this influences clinical practice and behavior requires further investigation.


Assuntos
Cardiologia/economia , Cardiologia/tendências , Conflito de Interesses/economia , Neurologistas/economia , Neurologistas/tendências , Cardiologia/legislação & jurisprudência , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./economia , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./legislação & jurisprudência , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./tendências , Conflito de Interesses/legislação & jurisprudência , Bases de Dados Factuais/tendências , Indústria Farmacêutica/economia , Indústria Farmacêutica/legislação & jurisprudência , Indústria Farmacêutica/tendências , Setor de Assistência à Saúde/economia , Setor de Assistência à Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Setor de Assistência à Saúde/tendências , Humanos , Neurologistas/legislação & jurisprudência , Fatores de Tempo , Estados Unidos
19.
Am J Prev Med ; 57(5): 621-628, 2019 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31564604

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Previous evidence has shown that smoke-free policies reduce hospital admissions due to respiratory causes, but the impact on 30-day readmission has not been determined. As 25 states in the U.S. have not adopted comprehensive smoke-free legislation, it is likely that patients return to an environment that increases risk of a secondary event. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of smoke-free policies on 30-day readmission rates for adults aged ≥65 years following hospitalization for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the U.S. METHODS: Data from the U.S. Tobacco Control Laws Database, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, American Hospital Association, Area Health Resource File, and U.S. Census Bureau Current Population Survey were merged at the county level for years 2013-2016 and analyzed in 2018. Hierarchical Poisson regression models were utilized to calculate incidence rate ratios to determine the impact of full, partial, and no smoke-free policies on 30-day readmission rates after chronic obstructive pulmonary disease hospitalization. RESULTS: Multivariable analysis adjusting for both county and hospital characteristics revealed that the presence of full (incidence rate ratio=0.81, 95% CI=0.76, 0.88) and partial (incidence rate ratio=0.87, 95% CI=0.81, 0.92) smoke-free policies were associated with fewer 30-day readmissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-related hospitalizations when compared with counties with no smoke-free policy. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of smoke-free policies is an effective measure for reducing 30-day readmissions following hospitalization due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, with stronger policies resulting in decreased risk. Efforts to reduce chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-related 30-day readmissions should include the implementation of smoke-free policies.


Assuntos
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./legislação & jurisprudência , Implementação de Plano de Saúde , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/prevenção & controle , Política Antifumo , Idoso , Simulação por Computador , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Modelos Estatísticos , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/epidemiologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...