African-American inflammatory bowel disease in a Southern U.S. health center

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) remain significant health problems in the US and worldwide. IBD is most often associated with eastern European ancestry, and is less frequently reported in other populations of African origin e.g. African Americans ('AAs'). Whether AAs represent an important population with IBD in the US remains unclear since few studies have investigated IBD in communities with a majority representation of AA patients. The Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center in Shreveport (LSUHSC-S) is a tertiary care medical center, with a patient base composed of 58% AA and 39% Caucasian (W), ideal for evaluating racial (AA vs. W) as well and gender (M vs. F) influences on IBD.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this retrospective study, we evaluated 951 visits to LSUHSC-S for IBD (between 2000 to 2008) using non-identified patient information based on ICD-9 medical record coding (Crohn's disease 'CD'-555.0- 555.9 and ulcerative colitis 'UC'-556.0-556.9).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall, there were more cases of CD seen than UC. UC and CD affected similar ratios of AA and Caucasian males (M) and females (F) with a rank order of WF > WM > AAF > AAM. Interestingly, in CD, we found that annual visits per person was the highest in AA M (10.7 ± 1.7); significantly higher (* -p < 0.05) than in WM (6.3 ± 1.0). Further, in CD, the female to male (F: M) ratio in AA was significantly higher (*- p < 0.05) (1.9 ± 0.2) than in Caucasians (F:M = 1.3 ± 0.1) suggesting a female dominance in AACD; no differences were seen in UC F: M ratios.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although Caucasians still represent the greatest fraction of IBD (~64%), AAs with IBD made up >1/3 (36.4%) of annual IBD cases from 2000-2008 at LSUHSC-S. Further studies on genetic and environments risks for IBD risk in AAs are needed to understand differences in presentation and progression in AAs and other 'non-traditional' populations.</p

The surgical safety checklist and patient outcomes after surgery: a prospective observational cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis

© 2017 British Journal of Anaesthesia Background: The surgical safety checklist is widely used to improve the quality of perioperative care. However, clinicians continue to debate the clinical effectiveness of this tool. Methods: Prospective analysis of data from the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), an international observational study of elective in-patient surgery, accompanied by a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. The exposure was surgical safety checklist use. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. In the ISOS cohort, a multivariable multi-level generalized linear model was used to test associations. To further contextualise these findings, we included the results from the ISOS cohort in a meta-analysis. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We included 44 814 patients from 497 hospitals in 27 countries in the ISOS analysis. There were 40 245 (89.8%) patients exposed to the checklist, whilst 7508 (16.8%) sustained ≥1 postoperative complications and 207 (0.5%) died before hospital discharge. Checklist exposure was associated with reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.49 (0.32–0.77); P\u3c0.01], but no difference in complication rates [OR 1.02 (0.88–1.19); P=0.75]. In a systematic review, we screened 3732 records and identified 11 eligible studies of 453 292 patients including the ISOS cohort. Checklist exposure was associated with both reduced postoperative mortality [OR 0.75 (0.62–0.92); P\u3c0.01; I2=87%] and reduced complication rates [OR 0.73 (0.61–0.88); P\u3c0.01; I2=89%). Conclusions: Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine