Implementation of a Rapid Post-Code Debrief Quality Improvement Project in a Community Emergency Department Setting.

CONTEXT: Regular debriefing has been associated with improved resource utilization and measurable improvements in team performance in crisis situations. While Emergency Department (ED) staff have often stated that they would like to be provided a formal debriefing model after "code blue" and similar events, few EDs have such protocols in place. METHODS: The study consisted of two data collection processes: (1) completion of a 7-item survey distributed pre-intervention, 6-months post-intervention, and 1-year post-intervention, and (2) completion of a Rapid Post-Code Debriefing form. Overall responses were measured on a possible 0-10 scale and individual responses were tracked. The debrief process was triggered by one of four criteria and followed a standard format using a readily available form. RESULTS: A total of 178 pre- and post-debriefing protocol implementation survey responses were collected throughout the duration of the study. Of those, 79 (44.4%) were pre-protocol response surveys. The post-protocol responses were comprised of 51 (51.5%) six month and 48 (48.5%) 12-month surveys. The average overall satisfaction with code-response performance increased significantly following the implementation of the debriefing protocol, from M=6.661, SD=2.028 to M=7.90, SD=1.359 (independent t-test = 5.069, p<0.001). There was a statistically significant decrease regarding how respondents felt emotionally supported after a code by their staff, (Pearson Chi Square 14.977, df 4, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: During this study, implementation of a post-code debriefing resulted in increased overall satisfaction with how codes had been conducted and there was a significant change in how staff felt in regards to code team leaders and an expectation of "returning to work." However, there a noted overall decrease in perceptions of feeling supported by other staff involved during the code. Further studies in both community and academic-based ED settings are needed to further explore these complex relationships.

High Out-of-Pocket Medical Spending among the Poor and Elderly in Nine Developed Countries.

OBJECTIVE: The design of health insurance, and the role out-of-pocket (OOP) payments play in it, is a key policy issue as rising health costs have encouraged greater cost-sharing measures. This paper compares the percentage of Americans spending large amounts OOP to meet their health needs with percentages in eight other developed countries. By disaggregating by age and income, the paper focuses on the poor and elderly populations within each. DATA SOURCE: The study uses nationally representative household survey data made available through the Luxembourg Income Study. It includes nations with high, medium, and low levels of OOP spending. STUDY DESIGN: Households have high medical spending when their OOP expenditures exceed a threshold share of income. I calculate the share of each nation's population, as well as subpopulations within it, with high OOP expenditures. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The United States is not alone in exposing large numbers of citizens to high OOP expenses. In six of the other eight countries, one-quarter or more of low-income citizens devoted at least 5 percent of their income to OOP expenses, and in all but two countries, more than 1 in 10 elderly citizens had high medical expenses. CONCLUSIONS: For some populations in the sample nations, health insurance does not provide adequate financial protection and likely contributes to inequities in health care delivery and outcomes.

The financial burden of out-of-pocket expenses in the United States and Canada: How different is the United States?

BACKGROUND: This article compares the burden that medical cost-sharing requirements place on households in the United States and Canada. It estimates the probability that individuals with similar demographic features in the two countries have large medical expenses relative to income. METHOD: The study uses 2010 nationally representative household survey data harmonized for cross-national comparisons to identify individuals with high medical expenses relative to income. Using logistic regression, it estimates the probability of high expenses occurring among 10 different demographic groups in the two countries. RESULTS: The results show the risk of large medical expenses in the United States is 1.5-4 times higher than it is in Canada, depending on the demographic group and spending threshold used. The United States compares least favorably when evaluating poorer citizens and when using a higher spending threshold. CONCLUSION: Recent health care reforms can be expected to reduce Americans' catastrophic health expenses, but it will take very large reductions in out-of-pocket expenditures-larger than can be expected-if poorer and middle-class families are to have the financial protection from high health care costs that their counterparts in Canada have.

Recent trends in the probability of high out-of-pocket medical expenses in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: This article measures the probability that out-of-pocket expenses in the United States exceed a threshold share of income. It calculates this probability separately by individuals' health condition, income, and elderly status and estimates changes occurring in these probabilities between 2010 and 2013. DATA AND METHOD: This article uses nationally representative household survey data on 344,000 individuals. Logistic regressions estimate the probabilities that out-of-pocket expenses exceed 5% and alternatively 10% of income in the two study years. These probabilities are calculated for individuals based on their income, health status, and elderly status. RESULTS: Despite favorable changes in both health policy and the economy, large numbers of Americans continue to be exposed to high out-of-pocket expenditures. For instance, the results indicate that in 2013 over a quarter of nonelderly low-income citizens in poor health spent 10% or more of their income on out-of-pocket expenses, and over 40% of this group spent more than 5%. Moreover, for Americans as a whole, the probability of spending in excess of 5% of income on out-of-pocket costs increased by 1.4 percentage points between 2010 and 2013, with the largest increases occurring among low-income Americans; the probability of Americans spending more than 10% of income grew from 9.3% to 9.6%, with the largest increases also occurring among the poor. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of out-of-pocket's financial burden and the most recent upward trends in it underscore a need to develop good measures of the degree to which health care policy exposes individuals to financial risk, and to closely monitor the Affordable Care Act's success in reducing Americans' exposure to large medical bills.

The incidence of high medical expenses by health status in seven developed countries.

Health care policy seeks to ensure that citizens are protected from the financial risk associated with needing health care. Yet rising health care costs in many countries are leading to a greater reliance on out-of-pocket (OOP) measures. This paper uses 2010 household survey data from seven countries to measure and compare the burden OOP expenses place on individuals. It compares countries based on the extent to which citizens with health problems devote a large share of their income to OOP expenses. The paper finds that in all countries but France, and to a lesser extent Slovenia, citizens with health problems face considerably higher medical costs than do those without. As many as one-quarter of less healthy citizens in the US, Poland, Russia and Israel devote a large share of their income to OOP expenses. The paper also finds a strong cross-national correlation between the degree to which citizens face high OOP expenses, and the disparities in OOP expenses between those with and without health problems. The levels of high OOP spending uncovered, and their inequitable impact on those with health problems in the seven countries, underscore the potential for OOP measures to undermine core objectives of health care systems, including those of equitable financing, equal access, and improved health among the population.