- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Tignanelli, Christopher"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Building to learn: Information technology innovations to enable rapid pragmatic evaluation in a learning health system(Wiley, 2024-04-16) Rajamani, Geetanjali; Melton, Genevieve B.; Pestka, Deborah L.; Peters, Maya; Ninkovic, Iva; Lindemann, Elizabeth; Beebe, Timothy J.; Shippee, Nathan; Benson, Bradley; Jacob, Abraham; Tignanelli, Christopher; Ingraham, Nicholas E.; Koopmeiners, Joseph S.; Usher, Michael G.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground: Learning health systems (LHSs) iteratively generate evidence that can be implemented into practice to improve care and produce generalizable knowledge. Pragmatic clinical trials fit well within LHSs as they combine real-world data and experiences with a degree of methodological rigor which supports generalizability. Objectives: We established a pragmatic clinical trial unit ("RapidEval") to support the development of an LHS. To further advance the field of LHS, we sought to further characterize the role of health information technology (HIT), including innovative solutions and challenges that occur, to improve LHS project delivery. Methods: During the period from December 2021 to February 2023, eight projects were selected out of 51 applications to the RapidEval program, of which five were implemented, one is currently in pilot testing, and two are in planning. We evaluated pre-study planning, implementation, analysis, and study closure approaches across all RapidEval initiatives to summarize approaches across studies and identify key innovations and learnings by gathering data from study investigators, quality staff, and IT staff, as well as RapidEval staff and leadership. Implementation results: Implementation approaches spanned a range of HIT capabilities including interruptive alerts, clinical decision support integrated into order systems, patient navigators, embedded micro-education, targeted outpatient hand-off documentation, and patient communication. Study approaches include pre-post with time-concordant controls (1), randomized stepped-wedge (1), cluster randomized across providers (1) and location (3), and simple patient level randomization (2). Conclusions: Study selection, design, deployment, data collection, and analysis required close collaboration between data analysts, informaticists, and the RapidEval team.Item Extending Trauma Quality Improvement Beyond Trauma Centers: Hospital Variation in Outcomes Among Nontrauma Hospitals(Wolters Kluwer, 2022) Jenkins, Peter C.; Timsina, Lava; Murphy, Patrick; Tignanelli, Christopher; Holena, Daniel N.; Hemmila, Mark R.; Newgard, Craig; Surgery, School of MedicineObjective: The American College of Surgeons (ACS) conducts a robust quality improvement program for ACS-verified trauma centers, yet many injured patients receive care at non-accredited facilities. This study tested for variation in outcomes across non-trauma hospitals and characterized hospitals associated with increased mortality. Summary background data: The study included state trauma registry data of 37,670 patients treated between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015. Clinical data were supplemented with data from the American Hospital Association and US Department of Agriculture, allowing comparisons among 100 nontrauma hospitals. Methods: Using Bayesian techniques, risk-adjusted and reliability-adjusted rates of mortality and interfacility transfer, as well as Emergency Departments length-of-stay (ED-LOS) among patients transferred from EDs were calculated for each hospital. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients ages >55 years and those with decreased Glasgow coma scores (GCS). Multiple imputation was used to address missing data. Results: Mortality varied 3-fold (0.9%-3.1%); interfacility transfer rates varied 46-fold (2.1%-95.6%); and mean ED-LOS varied 3-fold (81-231 minutes). Hospitals that were high and low statistical outliers were identified for each outcome, and subgroup analyses demonstrated comparable hospital variation. Metropolitan hospitals were associated increased mortality [odds ratio (OR) 1.7, P = 0.004], decreased likelihood of interfacility transfer (OR 0.7, P ≤ 0.001), and increased ED-LOS (coef. 0.1, P ≤ 0.001) when compared with nonmetropolitan hospitals and risk-adjusted. Conclusions: Wide variation in trauma outcomes exists across nontrauma hospitals. Efforts to improve trauma quality should include engagement of nontrauma hospitals to reduce variation in outcomes of injured patients treated at those facilities.