Assessing opinions in community leadership networks to address health inequalities: a case study from Project IMPACT.

This study demonstrates a novel approach that those engaged in promoting social change in health can use to analyze community power, mobilize it and enhance community capacity to reduce health inequalities. We used community reconnaissance methods to select and interview 33 participants from six leadership sectors in 'Milltown', the New England city where the study was conducted. We used UCINET network analysis software to assess the structure of local leadership and NVivo qualitative software to analyze leaders' views on public health and health inequalities. Our main analyses showed that community power is distributed unequally in Milltown, with our network of 33 divided into an older, largely male and more powerful group, and a younger, largely female group with many 'grassroots' sector leaders who focus on reducing health inequalities. Ancillary network analyses showed that grassroots leaders comprise a self-referential cluster that could benefit from greater affiliation with leaders from other sectors and identified leaders who may serve as leverage points in our overall program of public agenda change to address health inequalities. Our innovative approach provides public health practitioners with a method for assessing community leaders' views, understanding subgroup divides and mobilizing leaders who may be helpful in reducing health inequalities.

Evolution of Process and Outcome Measures during an Enhanced Recovery after Thoracic Surgery Program.

BACKGROUND: A time course analysis was undertaken to evaluate how perioperative process-of-care and outcome measures evolved after implementation of an enhanced recovery after thoracic surgery (ERATS) program. METHODS: Outcome and process-of-care measures were compared between patients undergoing major elective thoracic surgery during a 9-month pre-ERATS implementation period to those at 1-3, 4-6, and 7-9 months post-ERATS implementation. Outcome measures included length of stay, the 30-day readmission rate, 30-day emergency department visits, and minor and major adverse events. Process measures included first time to activity, out-of-bed, ambulation, fluid diet, diet as tolerated, as well as removal of the first and last chest tube, epidural, patient-controlled analgesia, and Foley and intravenous catheters. RESULTS: In total, 704 patients (352 pre-ERATS, 352 post-ERATS) were included. Mobilization-related process measures, including time to first activity (16.5 vs. 6.8 hours, p<0.001), out-of-bed (17.6 vs. 8.9 hours, p<0.001), and ambulation (32.4 vs. 25.4 hours, p=0.04) saw statistically significant improvements by 1-3 months post-ERATS implementation compared to pre-ERATS. Time to Foley removal improved by 4-6 months post-ERATS (19.5 vs. 18.2 hours, p=0.003). Outcome measures, including the 30-day readmission rate and emergency department visits, steadily decreased post-ERATS. By 7-9 months post-ERATS, both minor (18.2% vs. 7.9%, p=0.009) and major (13.6% vs. 4.4%, p=0.007) adverse events demonstrated statistically significant improvements. Length of stay trended towards improvement from 6.2 days pre-ERATS to 4.8 days by 7-9 months post-ERATS (p=0.06). CONCLUSION: The adoption of ERATS led to improvements in multiple process-of-care measures, which may collectively and gradually achieve optimization of clinical outcomes.