Browsing by Author "Ball, Kevin M."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Noninvasive Sphenopalatine Ganglion Block for Acute Headache in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial
    (Elsevier, 2015-05) Schaffer, Jason T.; Hunter, Benton R.; Ball, Kevin M.; Weaver, Christopher S.; Department of Emergency Medicine, IU School of Medicine
    Study objective We seek to test the efficacy of noninvasive sphenopalatine ganglion block for the treatment of acute anterior headache in the emergency department (ED) using a novel noninvasive delivery device. Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating bupivacaine anesthesia of the sphenopalatine ganglion for acute anterior or global-based headache. This study was completed in 2 large academic EDs. Bupivacaine or normal saline solution was delivered intranasally (0.3 mL per side) with the Tx360 device. Pain and nausea were measured at 0, 5, and 15 minutes by a 100-mm visual analog scale. The primary endpoint was a 50% reduction in pain at 15 minutes. Telephone follow-up assessed 24-hour pain and nausea through a 0- to 10-point verbal scale and adverse effects. Results The median reported baseline pain in the bupivacaine group was 80 mm (IQR 66 mm - 93 mm) and 78.5 mm (IQR 64 mm to 91.75 mm) in the normal saline solution group. A 50% reduction in pain was achieved in 48.8% of the bupivacaine group (20/41 patients) versus 41.3% in the normal saline solution group (19/46 patients), for an absolute risk difference of 7.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] –13% to 27.1%). As a secondary outcome, at 24 hours, more patients in the bupivacaine group were headache free (24.7% difference; 95% CI 2.6% to 43.6%) and more were nausea free (16.9% difference; 95% CI 0.8% to 32.5%). Conclusion For patients with acute anterior headache, sphenopalatine ganglion block with the Tx360 device with bupivacaine did not result in a significant increase in the proportion of patients achieving a greater than or equal to 50% reduction in headache severity at 15 minutes compared with saline solution applied in the same manner.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Reducing Operating Room Costs through Real Time Cost Information Feedback: A Pilot Study
    (Liebert, 2015-08) Tabib, Christian H.; Bahler, Clinton D.; Hardacker, Thomas J.; Ball, Kevin M.; Sundaram, Chandru P.; Department of Urology, IU School of Medicine
    Purpose: To create a protocol for providing real-time operating room (OR) cost feedback to surgeons. We hypothesize that this protocol will reduce costs in a responsible way without sacrificing quality of care. Methods: All OR costs were obtained and recorded for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Before the beginning of this project, costs pertaining to the 20 most recent cases were analyzed. Items were identified from previous cases as modifiable for replacement or omission. Timely feedback of total OR costs and cost of each item used was provided to the surgeon after each case, and costs were analyzed. Results: A cost analysis of the robot-assisted partial nephrectomy before the washout period indicates expenditures of $5243.04 per case. Ten recommended modifiable items were found to have an average per case cost of $1229.33 representing 23.4% of the total cost. A postwashout period cost analysis found the total OR cost decreased by $899.67 (17.2%) because of changes directly related to the modifiable items. Therefore, 73.2% of the possible identified savings was realized. The same stepwise approach was applied to laparoscopic donor nephrectomies. The average total cost per case before the washout period was $3530.05 with $457.54 attributed to modifiable items. After the washout period, modifiable items costs were reduced by $289.73 (8.0%). No complications occurred in the donor nephrectomy cases while one postoperative complication occurred in the partial nephrectomy group. Conclusion: Providing surgeons with feedback related to OR costs may lead to a change in surgeon behavior and decreased overall costs. Further studies are needed to show equivalence in patient outcomes.