40 research outputs found

    Turning value into action: Healthcare workers using digital media advocacy to drive change.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: The standard method of sharing information in academia is the scientific journal. Yet health advocacy requires alternative methods to reach key stakeholders to drive change. The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of social media and public narrative for advocacy in matters of firearm-related injury and death. STUDY DESIGN: The movement This Is Our Lane was evaluated through the #ThisIsOurLane and #ThisIsMyLane hashtags. Sources were assessed from November 2018 through March 2019. Analyses specifically examined message volume, time course, global engagement, and content across Twitter, scientific literature, and mass media. Twitter data were analyzed via Symplur Signals. Scientific literature reviews were performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Mass media was compiled using Access World News/Newsbank, Newspaper Source, and Google. RESULTS: A total of 507,813 tweets were shared using #ThisIsOurLane, #ThisIsMyLane, or both (co-occurrence 21-39%). Fifteen scientific items and n = 358 mass media publications were published during the study period; the latter included articles, blogs, television interviews, petitions, press releases, and audio interviews/podcasts. Peak messaging appeared first on Twitter on November 10th, followed by mass media on November 12th and 20th, and scientific publications during December. CONCLUSIONS: Social media enables clinicians to quickly disseminate information about a complex public health issue like firearms to the mainstream media, scientific community, and general public alike. Humanized data resonates with people and has the ability to transcend the barriers of language, culture, and geography. Showing society the reality of caring for firearm-related injuries through healthcare worker stories via digital media appears to be effective in shaping the public agenda and influencing real-world events

    The Integration of Electric Scooters: Useful Technology or Public Health Problem?

    No full text

    Four-Year Follow-Up of Endograft Repair of Traumatic Aortic Transection in a 10-Year-Old

    No full text
    The article presents a case study of a 10-year old male who was involved in a motor vehicle crash resulting in transection of the abdominal aorta at the origin of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA). The report performed an endovascular repair of traumatic aortic transection using a Zenith iliac limb endograft through a right common femoral artery cut down. Computed tomography of a child\u27s abdominal aorta reveals a well-healed aorta with the satisfactory position of endograft

    Association of System-Level Factors with Secondary Overtriage in Trauma Patients

    No full text
    Importance: Studies show that secondary overtriage (SO) contributes significantly to the economic burden of injured patients; thus, the association of SO with use of the trauma system has been examined. However, the association of the underlying trauma system design with such overtriage has yet to be evaluated. Objectives: To evaluate whether the distribution of trauma centers in a statewide trauma system is associated with SO and to identify clinical and demographic factors that may lead to SO. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was performed using 2008-2012 data from the Ohio Trauma and Emergency Medical Services registries. All patients taken to level III or nontrauma centers from the scene of the injury with an Injury Severity Score less than 15 and discharged alive were included. Among these patients, those with SO were identified as those who were subsequently transferred to a level I or II trauma center, had no surgical intervention, and were discharged alive within 48 hours of admission. The SO group was analyzed descriptively. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify system-level factors associated with SO. Statistical analysis was performed from August 1, 2017, to January 31, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the occurrence of SO. Results: Of 34494 trauma patients able to be matched in the 2 registries, 7881 (22.9%) met the inclusion criteria, of whom 965 (12.2%) had SO. The median age in the SO group was 40 years (interquartile range, 26-55 years), with 299 women and 666 men. After adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities, injury type, and insurance status, the study found that system-level factors (number of level I or II trauma centers in the region [\u3e1]) were significantly associated with SO (adjusted odds ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.64-2.38; P \u3c.001; area under the curve, 0.89). The reasons for choice of destination by emergency medical services (specifically, choosing the closest facility: adjusted odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.37-1.98; P \u3c.001) and use of a field trauma triage protocol (adjusted odds ratio, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.70-2.87; P \u3c.001), significantly increased the likelihood of SO. Conclusions and Relevance: This study\u27s findings suggest that the distribution of major trauma centers in the region is significantly associated with SO. Subsequent investigation to identify the optimal number and distribution of trauma centers may therefore be critical. Specific outreach and collaboration of level III trauma centers and nontrauma centers with level I and II trauma centers, along with the use of telemedicine, may provide further guidance to level III trauma centers and nontrauma centers on when to transfer injured patients

    Association of System-Level Factors with Secondary Overtriage in Trauma Patients

    No full text
    Importance: Studies show that secondary overtriage (SO) contributes significantly to the economic burden of injured patients; thus, the association of SO with use of the trauma system has been examined. However, the association of the underlying trauma system design with such overtriage has yet to be evaluated. Objectives: To evaluate whether the distribution of trauma centers in a statewide trauma system is associated with SO and to identify clinical and demographic factors that may lead to SO. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was performed using 2008-2012 data from the Ohio Trauma and Emergency Medical Services registries. All patients taken to level III or nontrauma centers from the scene of the injury with an Injury Severity Score less than 15 and discharged alive were included. Among these patients, those with SO were identified as those who were subsequently transferred to a level I or II trauma center, had no surgical intervention, and were discharged alive within 48 hours of admission. The SO group was analyzed descriptively. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify system-level factors associated with SO. Statistical analysis was performed from August 1, 2017, to January 31, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the occurrence of SO. Results: Of 34494 trauma patients able to be matched in the 2 registries, 7881 (22.9%) met the inclusion criteria, of whom 965 (12.2%) had SO. The median age in the SO group was 40 years (interquartile range, 26-55 years), with 299 women and 666 men. After adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities, injury type, and insurance status, the study found that system-level factors (number of level I or II trauma centers in the region [\u3e1]) were significantly associated with SO (adjusted odds ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.64-2.38; P \u3c.001; area under the curve, 0.89). The reasons for choice of destination by emergency medical services (specifically, choosing the closest facility: adjusted odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.37-1.98; P \u3c.001) and use of a field trauma triage protocol (adjusted odds ratio, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.70-2.87; P \u3c.001), significantly increased the likelihood of SO. Conclusions and Relevance: This study\u27s findings suggest that the distribution of major trauma centers in the region is significantly associated with SO. Subsequent investigation to identify the optimal number and distribution of trauma centers may therefore be critical. Specific outreach and collaboration of level III trauma centers and nontrauma centers with level I and II trauma centers, along with the use of telemedicine, may provide further guidance to level III trauma centers and nontrauma centers on when to transfer injured patients
    corecore