King y su juguete favorito

Victoria Rodrigo, PhD- Serie Leamos’ EditorProfessor of Spanish World Languages and Cultures DepartmentGeorgia State Universityhttps://scholarworks.gsu.edu/wcl_leamos/1007/thumbnail.jp

Methods to Describe Referral Patterns in a Canadian Primary Care Electronic Medical Record Database: Modelling Multilevel Count Data

Background: A referral from a family physician (FP) to a specialist is an inflection point in the patient journey, with potential implications for clinical outcomes and health policy. Primary care electronic medical record (EMR) databases offer opportunities to examine referral patterns. Until recently, software techniques were not available to model these kinds of multi-level count data. Objective: To establish methodology for determining referral rates from FPs to medical specialists using the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) EMR database. Method: Retrospective cohort study, mixed effects and multi-level negative binomial regression modelling with 87,258 eligible patients between 2007 and 2012. Mean referrals compared by patient sex, age, chronic conditions, FP visits, and urban/rural practice location. Proportion of variance in referral rates attributable to the patient and practice levels. Results: On average, males had 0.26, and females 0.31 referrals in a 12-month period. Referrals were significantly higher for females, increased with age, FP visits, and number of chronic conditions (p\u3c.0001). Overall, 14% of the variance in referrals could be attributed to the practice level, and 86% to patient level characteristics. Conclusions: Both patient and practice characteristics influenced referral patterns. The methodologic insights gained from this study have relevance to future studies on many research questions that utilize count data, both within primary care and broader health services research. The utility of the CPCSSN database will continue to increase in tandem with data quality improvements, providing a valuable resource to study Canadian referral patterns over time

Examining the symptom of fatigue in primary care: a comparative study using electronic medical records

Background The symptom of fatigue is one of the top five most frequently presented health complaints in primary care, yet it remains underexplored in the Canadian primary care context.Objective The objective of this study was to examine the prevalence and impact of patients presenting with fatigue in primary care, using the only known electronic database in Canada to capture patient-reported symptoms.Methods Data were extracted from the Deliver Primary Healthcare Information (DELPHI) database, an electronic medical record database located in Ontario, Canada. Patients were identified using the International Classification of Primary Care, Revised Second Edition coding system. Two groups of patients (fatigue or non-fatigue symptom) were followed for one year and compared. Both descriptive and multivariable analyses were conducted.Results A total of 103 fatigue symptom patients, and 103 non-fatigue symptom patients, were identified in the DELPHI database. The period prevalence of fatigue presentation was 8.2%, with the majority of patients being female and over 60 years of age. These patients experienced numerous co-occurring morbidities, in addition to the fatigue itself. During the one year follow-up period, fatigue symptom patients had significantly higher rates of subsequent visits (IRR = 1.19, p = 0.038) and investigations (IRR = 1.68, p < 0.001), and markedly high levels of referrals following their index visit.Conclusions This research used an electronic database to examine the symptom, fatigue. Using these data, fatigue symptom patients were found to have higher rates of health care utilisation, compared to non-fatigue symptom patients

Improving person-centered care for people with multimorbidity: the potential of participatory learning and action research

No abstract available

How do we evaluate the cost of nosocomial infection? The ECONI protocol: an incidence study with nested case-control evaluating cost and quality of life

Introduction Healthcare-associated or nosocomial infection (HAI) is distressing to patients and costly for the National Health Service (NHS). With increasing pressure to demonstrate cost-effectiveness of interventions to control HAI and notwithstanding the risk from antimicrobial-resistant infections, there is a need to understand the incidence rates of HAI and costs incurred by the health system and for patients themselves. Methods and analysis The Evaluation of Cost of Nosocomial Infection study (ECONI) is an observational incidence survey with record linkage and a nested case-control study that will include postdischarge longitudinal follow-up and qualitative interviews. ECONI will be conducted in one large teaching hospital and one district general hospital in NHS Scotland. The case mix of these hospitals reflects the majority of overnight admissions within Scotland. An incidence survey will record all HAI cases using standard case definitions. Subsequent linkage to routine data sets will provide information on an admission cohort which will be grouped into HAI and non-HAI cases. The case-control study will recruit eligible patients who develop HAI and twice that number without HAI as controls. Patients will be asked to complete five questionnaires: the first during their stay, and four others during the year following discharge from their recruitment admission (1, 3, 6 and 12 months). Multiple data collection methods will include clinical case note review; patient-reported outcome; linkage to electronic health records and qualitative interviews. Outcomes collected encompass infection types; morbidity and mortality; length of stay; quality of life; healthcare utilisation; repeat admissions and postdischarge prescribing. Ethics and dissemination The study has received a favourable ethical opinion from the Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (reference 16/SS/0199). All publications arising from this study will be published in open-access peer-reviewed journal. Lay-person summaries will be published on the ECONI website. Trial registration number NCT03253640; Pre-results

The prevalence of multimorbidity in primary care: a comparison of two definitions of multimorbidity with two different lists of chronic conditions in Singapore

Background: The prevalence of multimorbidity varies widely due to the lack of consensus in defining multimorbidity. This study aimed to measure the prevalence of multimorbidity in a primary care setting using two definitions of multimorbidity with two different lists of chronic conditions. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 787,446 patients, aged 0 to 99 years, who consulted a family physician between July 2015 to June 2016. Multimorbidity was defined as ‘two or more’ (MM2+) or ‘three or more’ (MM3+) chronic conditions using the Fortin list and Chronic Disease Management Program (CDMP) list of chronic conditions. Crude and standardised prevalence rates were reported, and the corresponding age, sex or ethnic-stratified standardised prevalence rates were adjusted to the local population census. Results: The number of patients with multimorbidity increased with age. Age-sex-ethnicity standardised prevalence rates of multimorbidity using MM2+ and MM3+ for Fortin list (25.9, 17.2%) were higher than those for CDMP list (22.0%; 12.4%). Sex-stratified, age-ethnicity standardised prevalence rates for MM2+ and MM3+ were consistently higher in males compared to females for both lists. Chinese and Indians have the highest standardised prevalence rates among the four ethnicities using MM2+ and MM3+ respectively. Conclusions: MM3+ was better at identifying a smaller number of patients with multimorbidity requiring higher needs compared to MM2+. Using the Fortin list seemed more appropriate than the CDMP list because the chronic conditions in Fortin’s list were more commonly seen in primary care. A consistent definition of multimorbidity will help researchers and clinicians to understand the epidemiology of multimorbidity better

Impact of COVID-19 on Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Minnesota

1044724Minnesota\u2019s Office of Civil Rights at the Minnesota Department of Transportation administers the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program. The DBE program is intended to remedy past and current discrimination against disadvantaged business enterprises, ensure a level playing field and foster equal opportunity in DOT-assisted contracts, improve the flexibility and efficiency of the DBE program, and reduce burdens on small businesses. The last Needs Assessment of The Minnesota Department of Transportation\u2019s (MnDOT) Office of Civil Rights Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) and On-the-Job Training/Supportive Services (OJT/SS) programs was conducted in 2020. With the emergence of the COVID-19 global pandemic, MnDOT\u2019s Office of Civil Rights partnered with The Improve Group, a research and evaluation firm, to develop and conduct an analysis on the impact of COVID-19 on disadvantaged business enterprises in Minnesota engaged in highway heavy construction and providing professional and technical services. In assessing this impact, The Improve Group utilized both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods to outline the effects of COVID-19 on business stability, support received from MnDOT to alleviate impact, and generate recommendations for MnDOT to consider for use in the future

Systematic review on the instruments used for measuring the association of the level of multimorbidity and clinically important outcomes

Objectives There are multiple instruments for measuring multimorbidity. The main objective of this systematic review was to provide a list of instruments that are suitable for use in studies aiming to measure the association of a specific outcome with different levels of multimorbidity as the main independent variable in community-dwelling individuals. The secondary objective was to provide details of the requirements, strengths and limitations of these instruments, and the chosen outcomes. Methods We conducted the review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018105297). We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL electronic databases published in English and manually searched the Journal of Comorbidity between 1 January 2010 and 23 October 2020 inclusive. Studies also had to select adult patients from primary care or general population and had at least one specified outcome variable. Two authors screened the titles, abstracts and full texts independently. Disagreements were resolved with a third author. The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used for quality assessment. Results Ninety-six studies were identified, with 69 of them rated to have a low risk of bias. In total, 33 unique instruments were described. Disease Count and weighted indices like Charlson Comorbidity Index were commonly used. Other approaches included pharmaceutical-based instruments. Disease Count was the common instrument used for measuring all three essential core outcomes of multimorbidity research: Mortality, mental health and quality of life. There was a rise in the development of novel weighted indices by using prognostic models. The data obtained for measuring multimorbidity were from sources including medical records, patient self-reports and large administrative databases. Conclusions We listed the details of 33 instruments for measuring the level of multimorbidity as a resource for investigators interested in the measurement of multimorbidity for its association with or prediction of a specific outcome. © 2021 Author(s). Published by BMJ