Fatores de atraso na alta hospitalar em hospitais de ensino

OBJETIVO Analisar os motivos de atraso na alta hospitalar de pacientes internados em enfermarias de clínica médica. MÉTODOS Foram analisados 395 prontuários de pacientes consecutivos das enfermarias de clínica médica de dois hospitais públicos de ensino: Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais e Hospital Odilon Behrens. Foi utilizado o Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol para definir o momento a partir do qual as anotações do prontuário permitiam concluir que a permanência no hospital não mais era adequada. O intervalo entre esse momento e a data da alta hospitalar efetivada definiu o total de dias de atraso na alta hospitalar. Foi utilizado, sistematicamente, instrumento para categorizar os motivos de atraso da alta hospitalar, tendo sido realizada análise de frequências. RESULTADOS O atraso na alta hospitalar ocorreu em 60,0% das 207 internações do Hospital das Clínicas e em 58,0% das 188 internações do Hospital Odilon Behrens. O atraso por paciente foi em média de 4,5 dias no primeiro e 4,1 dias no segundo, o que corresponde à taxa de ocupação de 23,0% e 28,0% em cada hospital, respectivamente. Os principais motivos de atraso nos dois hospitais foram, respectivamente: espera para realização de exames complementares (30,6% e 34,7%) ou para liberação dos laudos dos exames (22,4% e 11,9%) e os relacionados à responsabilidade médica (36,2% e 26,1%), compreendendo a demora na discussão do caso clínico e na tomada de decisão clínica e dificuldades nas interconsultas, respectivamente (20,4% e 9,1%). CONCLUSÕES Foi constatado percentual elevado de atraso na alta hospitalar nos dois hospitais. O atraso foi devido principalmente a fatores relacionados a processos, que podem ser melhorados por intervenções da equipe assistencial e dos gestores. O impacto na média de permanência hospitalar e na taxa de ocupação foi expressivo e preocupante, num cenário de relativa escassez de leitos e longas esperas por internação

A stroke-adapted 30-item version of the sickness impact profile to assess quality of life (SA-SIP30)

Background and Purpose In view of the growing therapeutic options in stroke, measurement of quality of life has become increasingly relevant as an outcome parameter. The Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) is one of the most widely used measures to assess quality of life. To overcome the major disadvantage of the SIP, its length, we constructed a short stroke adapted 30-item SIP version (SA-SIP30). Methods Data on the original SIP version were collected for 319 communicative patients at 6 months after stroke. The 12 subscales and the 136 items of the original SIP were reduced to 8 subscales with 30 items in a three step procedure, on the basis of relevancy and homogeneity. Reliability of the SA-SIP30 was evaluated by means of an analysis of homogeneity (Cronbach's alpha coefficient). Different types of validity were assessed: construct, clinical, and external validities. Results Homogeneity of the SA-SIP30 was demonstrated by a high Cronbach's a (0.85). Principal component analyses revealed the same two dimensions as in the original SIP (a physical and a psychosocial dimension). The SA-SIP30 could explain 91% of the variation in scores of the original SIP in the same cohort of patients, and 89% in a different cohort. Furthermore, the SA-SIP30 was related to other functional health measures similar to how the original SIP was. We could demonstrate that the SA SIP30 was able to distinguish patients with lacunar infarctions from patients with cortical or subcortical lesions. Conclusions We conclude that the SA-SIP30 is a feasible and clinimetrically sound measure to assess quality of life after stroke

International Variation in Surgical Practices in Units Performing Oesophagectomy for Oesophageal Cancer: A Unit Survey from the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA)

Background: Anastomotic leaks are associated with significant risk of morbidity, mortality and treatment costs after oesophagectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate international variation in unit-level clinical practice and resource availability for the prevention and management of anastomotic leak following oesophagectomy. Method: The Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) is an international research collaboration focussed on improving the care and outcomes of patients undergoing oesophagectomy. Any unit performing oesophagectomy worldwide can register to participate in OGAA studies. An online unit survey was developed and disseminated to lead surgeons at each unit registered to participate in OGAA. High-income country (HIC) and low/middle-income country (LMIC) were defined according to the World Bank whilst unit volume were defined as ' 20 versus 20–59 versus ≥60 cases/year in the unit. Results: Responses were received from 141 units, a 77% (141/182) response rate. Median annual oesophagectomy caseload was reported to be 26 (inter-quartile range 12–50). Only 48% (68/141) and 22% (31/141) of units had an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program and ERAS nurse, respectively. HIC units had significantly higher rates of stapled anastomosis compared to LMIC units (66 vs 31%, p = 0.005). Routine post-operative contrast-swallow anastomotic assessment was performed in 52% (73/141) units. Stent placement and interventional radiology drainage for anastomotic leak management were more commonly available in HICs than LMICs (99 vs 59%, p ' 0.001 and 99 vs 83%, p ' 0.001). Conclusions: This international survey highlighted variation in surgical technique and management of anastomotic leak based on case volume and country income level. Further research is needed to understand the impact of this variation on patient outcomes

International Variation in Surgical Practices in Units Performing Oesophagectomy for Oesophageal Cancer: A Unit Survey from the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA).

Background: Anastomotic leaks are associated with significant risk of morbidity, mortality and treatment costs after oesophagectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate international variation in unit-level clinical practice and resource availability for the prevention and management of anastomotic leak following oesophagectomy. Method: The Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) is an international research collaboration focussed on improving the care and outcomes of patients undergoing oesophagectomy. Any unit performing oesophagectomy worldwide can register to participate in OGAA studies. An online unit survey was developed and disseminated to lead surgeons at each unit registered to participate in OGAA. High-income country (HIC) and low/middle-income country (LMIC) were defined according to the World Bank whilst unit volume were defined as < 20 versus 20\u201359 versus 6560 cases/year in the unit. Results: Responses were received from 141 units, a 77% (141/182) response rate. Median annual oesophagectomy caseload was reported to be 26 (inter-quartile range 12\u201350). Only 48% (68/141) and 22% (31/141) of units had an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program and ERAS nurse, respectively. HIC units had significantly higher rates of stapled anastomosis compared to LMIC units (66 vs 31%, p = 0.005). Routine post-operative contrast-swallow anastomotic assessment was performed in 52% (73/141) units. Stent placement and interventional radiology drainage for anastomotic leak management were more commonly available in HICs than LMICs (99 vs 59%, p < 0.001 and 99 vs 83%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This international survey highlighted variation in surgical technique and management of anastomotic leak based on case volume and country income level. Further research is needed to understand the impact of this variation on patient outcomes. \ua9 2019, Soci\ue9t\ue9 Internationale de Chirurgie