12 research outputs found
BHPR research: qualitative1.âComplex reasoning determines patients' perception of outcome following foot surgery in rheumatoid arhtritis
Background: Foot surgery is common in patients with RA but research into surgical outcomes is limited and conceptually flawed as current outcome measures lack face validity: to date no one has asked patients what is important to them. This study aimed to determine which factors are important to patients when evaluating the success of foot surgery in RA Methods: Semi structured interviews of RA patients who had undergone foot surgery were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted to explore issues that were important to patients. Results: 11 RA patients (9 â, mean age 59, dis dur = 22yrs, mean of 3 yrs post op) with mixed experiences of foot surgery were interviewed. Patients interpreted outcome in respect to a multitude of factors, frequently positive change in one aspect contrasted with negative opinions about another. Overall, four major themes emerged. Function: Functional ability & participation in valued activities were very important to patients. Walking ability was a key concern but patients interpreted levels of activity in light of other aspects of their disease, reflecting on change in functional ability more than overall level. Positive feelings of improved mobility were often moderated by negative self perception ("I mean, I still walk like a waddling duckâ). Appearance: Appearance was important to almost all patients but perhaps the most complex theme of all. Physical appearance, foot shape, and footwear were closely interlinked, yet patients saw these as distinct separate concepts. Patients need to legitimize these feelings was clear and they frequently entered into a defensive repertoire ("it's not cosmetic surgery; it's something that's more important than that, you know?â). Clinician opinion: Surgeons' post operative evaluation of the procedure was very influential. The impact of this appraisal continued to affect patients' lasting impression irrespective of how the outcome compared to their initial goals ("when he'd done it ... he said that hasn't worked as good as he'd wanted to ... but the pain has goneâ). Pain: Whilst pain was important to almost all patients, it appeared to be less important than the other themes. Pain was predominately raised when it influenced other themes, such as function; many still felt the need to legitimize their foot pain in order for health professionals to take it seriously ("in the end I went to my GP because it had happened a few times and I went to an orthopaedic surgeon who was quite dismissive of it, it was like what are you complaining aboutâ). Conclusions: Patients interpret the outcome of foot surgery using a multitude of interrelated factors, particularly functional ability, appearance and surgeons' appraisal of the procedure. While pain was often noted, this appeared less important than other factors in the overall outcome of the surgery. Future research into foot surgery should incorporate the complexity of how patients determine their outcome Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interes
COVID-19 safety: aerosol-generating procedures and cardiothoracic surgery and anaesthesia - Australian and New Zealand consensus statement
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVIDâ19) is a contagious disease that is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSâCoVâ2). Health care workers are at risk of infection from aerosolisation of respiratory secretions, droplet and contact spread. There are a number of procedures that represent a high risk of aerosol generation during cardiothoracic surgery. It is important that adequate training, equipment and procedures are in place to reduce that risk. We provide a number of key recommendations, which reduce the risk of aerosol generation during cardiothoracic surgery and help protect patients and staff. These include general measures such as patient risk stratification, appropriate use of personal protective equipment, consideration to delay surgery in positive patients, and careful attention to theatre planning and preparation. There are also recommended procedural interventions during airway management, transoesophageal echocardiography, cardiopulmonary bypass, chest drain management and specific cardiothoracic surgical procedures. Controversies exist regarding the management of low risk patients undergoing procedures at high risk of aerosol generation, and recommendations for these patients will change depending on the regional prevalence, risk of community transmission and the potential for asymptomatic patients attending for these procedures. This statement reflects changes in management based on expert opinion, national guidelines and available evidence. Our knowledge with regard to COVIDâ19 continues to evolve and with this, guidance may change and develop. Our colleagues are urged to follow national guidelines and institutional recommendations regarding best practices to protect their patients and themselves. Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons and the Anaesthetic Continuing Education Cardiac Thoracic Vascular and Perfusion Special Interest Group
Hospital Characteristics Associated With Penalties in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program
IMPORTANCE: In fiscal year (FY) 2015, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) instituted the Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program, which reduces payments to the lowest-performing hospitals. However, it is uncertain whether this program accurately measures quality and fairly penalizes hospitals.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the characteristics of hospitals penalized by the HAC Reduction Program and to evaluate the association of a summary score of hospital characteristics related to quality with penalization in the HAC program.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data for hospitals participating in the FY2015 HAC Reduction Program were obtained from CMS\u27 Hospital Compare and merged with the 2014 American Hospital Association Annual Survey and FY2015 Medicare Impact File. Logistic regression models were developed to examine the association between hospital characteristics and HAC program penalization. An 8-point hospital quality summary score was created using hospital characteristics related to volume, accreditations, and offering of advanced care services. The relationship between the hospital quality summary score and HAC program penalization was examined. Publicly reported process-of-care and outcome measures were examined from 4 clinical areas (surgery, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, pneumonia), and their association with the hospital quality summary score was evaluated.
EXPOSURES: Penalization in the HAC Reduction Program.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hospital characteristics associated with penalization.
RESULTS: Of the 3284 hospitals participating in the HAC program, 721 (22.0%) were penalized. Hospitals were more likely to be penalized if they were accredited by the Joint Commission (24.0% accredited, 14.4% not accredited; odds ratio [OR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.70); they were major teaching hospitals (42.3%; OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.09-2.29) or very major teaching hospitals (62.2%; OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.55-4.39; vs nonteaching hospitals, 17.0%); they cared for more complex patient populations based on case mix index (quartile 4 vs quartile 1: 32.8% vs 12.1%; OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.44-2.71); or they were safety-net hospitals vs non-safety-net hospitals (28.3% vs 19.9%; OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.11-1.68). Hospitals with higher hospital quality summary scores had significantly better performance on 9 of 10 publicly reported process and outcomes measures compared with hospitals that had lower quality scores (all Pââ€â.01 for trend). However, hospitals with the highest quality score of 8 were penalized significantly more frequently than hospitals with the lowest quality score of 0 (67.3% [37/55] vs 12.6% [53/422]; Pâ\u3câ.001 for trend).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among hospitals participating in the HAC Reduction Program, hospitals that were penalized more frequently had more quality accreditations, offered advanced services, were major teaching institutions, and had better performance on other process and outcome measures. These paradoxical findings suggest that the approach for assessing hospital penalties in the HAC Reduction Program merits reconsideration to ensure it is achieving the intended goals
Evaluation of readmissions due to surgical site infections: A potential target for quality improvement.
INTRODUCTION: Readmissions have become a focus of pay-for-performance programs. Surgical site infections (SSI) are the reason for most readmissions. Readmissions for SSI could be a unique target for quality improvement.
METHODS: Readmission risk for SSI were evaluated for patients undergoing colectomies from 2013 to 2014. Hazard models were developed to examine factors associated with and hospital-level variation in risk-adjusted rates of readmission for SSI.
RESULTS: Among 59,088 patients at 525 hospitals, the rate of readmissions for SSI ranged from 1.45% to 6.34%. Characteristics associated with a greater likelihood of SSI readmissions include male gender, smoking, open surgery and hospitals with increased socioeconomically-disadvantaged patients. After risk adjustment, there was little correlation between hospital performance with SSI readmission rate and performance with overall SSI or total readmission rate (r
CONCLUSIONS: Readmission for SSI represents a unique aspect of quality beyond that offered by measuring only SSI or readmission rates alone, and may provide actionable quality improvement
Interactions between betaâ2 adrenoceptor gene variation, cardiovascular control and dietary sodium in healthy young adults
Prognostic impact of deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) in 7,803 stage II/III colon cancer (CC) patients (pts): A pooled individual pt data analysis of 17 adjuvant trials in the ACCENT database.
Long-Term Outcome of IPAA in Patients Presenting with Fulminant Ulcerative Colitis: A Matched Cohort Study
Randomized trial of drain antisepsis after mastectomy and immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction.
BackgroundIn this 2-site randomized trial, we investigated the effect of antiseptic drain care on bacterial colonization of surgical drains and infection after immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction.MethodsWith IRB approval, we randomized patients undergoing bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction to drain antisepsis (treatment) for one side, with standard drain care (control) for the other. Antisepsis care included both: chlorhexidine disc dressing at drain exit site(s) and irrigation of drain bulbs twice daily with dilute sodium hypochlorite solution. Cultures were obtained from bulb fluid at 1 week and at drain removal, and from the subcutaneous drain tubing at removal. Positive cultures were defined as â„1+ growth for fluid and >50 CFU for tubing.ResultsCultures of drain bulb fluid at 1 week (the primary endpoint) were positive in 9.9 % of treatment sides (10 of 101) versus 20.8 % (21 of 101) of control sides (p = 0.02). Drain tubing cultures were positive in 0 treated drains versus 6.2 % (6 of 97) of control drains (p = 0.03). Surgical site infection occurred within 30 days in 0 antisepsis sides versus 3.8 % (4 of 104) of control sides (p = 0.13), and within 1 year in three of 104 (2.9 %) of antisepsis sides versus 6 of 104 (5.8 %) of control sides (p = 0.45). Clinical infection occurred within 1 year in 9.7 % (6 of 62) of colonized sides (tubing or fluid) versus 1.5 % (2 of 136) of noncolonized sides (p = 0.03).ConclusionsSimple and inexpensive local antiseptic interventions with a chlorhexidine disc and hypochlorite solution reduce bacterial colonization of drains, and reduced drain colonization was associated with fewer infections