- Browse by Subject
Browsing by Subject "patient outcomes"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item ASGE Guideline on the Role of Ergonomics for Prevention of Endoscopy-related Injury (ERI): Methodology and Review of Evidence(ASGE, 2023-10) Pawa, Swati; Kwon, Richard S.; Fishman, Douglas S.; Thosani, Nirav C.; Shergill, Amandeep; Grover , Samir C.; Al-Haddad , Mohammad; Amateau, Stuart K.; Buxbaum , James L.; Calderwood , Audrey H.; Chalhoub, Jean M.; Coelho-Prabhu, Nayantara; Desai, Madhav; Elhanafi, Sherif E.; Forbes, Nauzer; Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.; Kohli, Divyanshoo R.; Machicado , Jorge D.; Marya, Neil B.; Ruan, Wenly; Sheth, Sunil G.; Storm, Andrew C.; Thiruvengadam, Nikhil R.; Wani, Sachin; Qumseya, Bashar J.; Medicine, School of MedicineThis guideline document was prepared by the Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy using the best available scientific evidence and considering a multitude of variables including but not limited to adverse events, patient values, and cost implications. The purpose of these guidelines is to provide the best practice recommendations, which may help standardize patient care, improve patient outcomes, and reduce variability in practice. We recognize that clinical decision-making is complex. Guidelines, therefore, are not a substitute for a clinician’s judgment. Such judgements may at times seem contradictory to our guidance because of many factors that are impossible to fully consider by guideline developers. Any clinical decisions should be based on the clinician’s experience, local expertise, resource availability, and patient values and preferences. This document is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating for, mandating, or discouraging any particular treatment. Our guidelines should not be used in support of medical complaints, legal proceedings, and/or litigation, as they were not designed for this purpose.Item Description of Work Processes Used by Clinical Nurse Specialists to Improve Patient Outcomes(Elsevier, 2019) Fulton, Janet S.; Mayo, Ann; Walker, Jane; Urden, Linda D.; School of NursingItem Medication Errors in Injured Patients(2017) Dolejs, Scott C.; Janowak, Christopher F.; Zarzaur, Ben L.; Surgery, School of MedicineTrauma patients are vulnerable to medication error given multiple handoffs throughout the hospital. The purpose of this study was to assess trends in medication errors in trauma patients and the role these errors play in patient outcomes. Injured adults admitted from 2009 to 2015 to a Level I trauma center were included. Medication errors were determined based on a nurse-driven, validated, and prospectively maintained database. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to control for differences between groups. Among 15,635 injured adults admitted during the study period, 132 patients experienced 243 errors. Patients who experienced errors had significantly worse injury severity, lower Glasgow Coma Scale scores and higher rates of hypotension on admission, and longer lengths of stay. Before adjustment, mortality was similar between groups but morbidity was higher in the medication error group. After risk adjustment, there were no significant differences in morbidity or mortality between the groups. Medication errors in trauma patients tend to occur in significantly injured patients with long hospital stays. Appropriate adjustment when studying the impact of medical errors on patient outcomes is important.Item THE PATIENT-SPECIFIC INJURY SCORE: PRECISION MEDICINE IN TRAUMA PATIENTS PREDICTS ORGAN DYSFUNCTION AND OUTCOMES(Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2016-04-08) Metzger, C.; McCarroll, T.; Bakdash, K.; Zarzaur, B.; Steenberg, S.; Cutshall, A.; Brown, K.; Savage, S.; McKinley, T.O.; Gaski, G.E.Introduction: Current injury scoring systems in polytraumatized patients are limited at predicting patient outcomes. We present a novel method that quantifies mechanical tissue damage and cumulative hypoperfusion using a precision medicine approach. We hypothesized that a Patient-Specific Injury score formulated from individualized injury indices would stratify patient risk for developing organ dysfunction after injury. We compared correspondence between PSI and the Injury Severity Score with outcomes of organ dysfunction and MOF. Methods: Fifty Multiply-injured-patients (MIPs) were studied. Tissue Damage Volume scores were measured from admission pan-axial CT scans using purpose-designed post-processing software to quantify volumetric magnitude and distribution of injuries. Ischemic injury was quantified using Shock Volumes. SV is a time-magnitude integration of shock index. Values above 0.9 were measured in the 24-hours after injury. Metabolic response was quantified by subtracting the lowest first 24 hr pH from 7.40. PSI combines these indices into the formula: PSI=[0.2TDV+SV]*MR. Correspondence coefficients from regression modeling between PSI and organ dysfunction, measured by the Marshall Multiple Organ Dysfunction score averaged from days 2-5 post-injury, were compared to similar regression models of ISS vs. day 2-5 MOD-scores. We compared PSI and ISS in patients that did or did not develop MOF. Results: PSI demonstrated better correlation to organ dysfunction (r2=0.576) in comparison to ISS (r2=0.393) using the MOD-score on days 2-5. Mean PSI increased 3.4x(58.5vs.17.0;p<0.02) and ISS scores increased 1.4x(39.0vs.28.0;p=0.10) in patients that developed MOF versus those that did not. Conclusions: This study shows that a precision medicine approach that integrates patient-specific indices of mechanical tissue damage, ischemic tissue injury, and metabolic response better corresponds to phenotypic changes including organ dysfunction and MOF compared to ISS in MIPs. The PSI-score can be calculated within 24 hours of injury, making it useful for stratifying risk and predicting the magnitude of organ dysfunction to anticipate.Item Use of a novel vasoactive-ventilation-renal score to predict outcomes after paediatric cardiac surgery(Oxford, 2014-12) Miletic, Kyle G.; Spiering, Tyler J.; Delius, Ralph E.; Walters, Henry L. III; Mastropietro, Christopher W.; Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of MedicineOBJECTIVES Prior studies have established peak postoperative lactate and the vasoactive-inotrope score (VIS) as modest predictors of outcome following paediatric cardiac surgery. We developed a novel vasoactive-ventilation-renal (VVR) score and aimed to determine if this index, which incorporates postoperative respiratory, cardiovascular and renal function, would more consistently predict outcome in this patient population. METHODS We performed an Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective analysis of 222 infants at our institution less than 365 days old who underwent surgery for congenital heart disease at our centre from January 2009 to April 2013. The VVR score was calculated as follows: vasoactive-inotrope score + ventilation index + (change in serum creatinine from baseline × 10). For all patients, peak lactate and admission, peak, and 48 h VIS and VVR were recorded. RESULTS For all outcome measures, areas under the curve for 48-h VVR were greater than its corresponding admission and peak values, VIS alone at all three time points and peak lactate. On multivariate regression, 48-h VVR was strongly associated with prolonged intubation [odds ratio (OR): 39.13, P <0.0001], significantly more so than 48-h VIS (odds ratio: 6.18, P <0.0001) and peak lactate (odds ratio: 2.52, P = 0.017). The 48-h VVR was also more significantly associated with prolonged use of vasoactive infusions, chest tube drainage and ICU and hospital stay when compared with VIS alone and peak lactate. CONCLUSIONS The novel 48-h VVR was a robust predictor of outcome following paediatric cardiac surgery and outperformed the VIS and peak postoperative lactate.Item Using Incident Reports to Assess Communication Failures and Patient Outcomes(Elsevier, 2019-06) Umberfield, Elizabeth; Ghaferi, Amir A.; Krein, Sarah L.; Manojlovich, Milisa; Health Policy and Management, School of Public HealthIntroduction Communication failures pose a significant threat to the quality of care and safety of hospitalized patients. Yet little is known about the nature of communication failures. The aims of this study were to identify and describe types of communication failures in which nurses and physicians were involved and determine how different types of communication failures might affect patient outcomes. Methods Incident reports filed during fiscal year 2015–2016 at a Midwestern academic health care system (N = 16,165) were electronically filtered and manually reviewed to identify reports that described communication failures involving nurses and physicians (n = 161). Failures were categorized by type using two classification systems: contextual and conceptual. Thematic analysis was used to identify patient outcomes: actual or potential harm, patient dissatisfaction, delay in care, or no harm. Frequency of failure types and outcomes were assessed using descriptive statistics. Associations between failure type and patient outcomes were evaluated using Fisher's exact test. Results Of the 211 identified contextual communication failures, errors of omission were the most common (27.0%). More than half of conceptual failures were transfer of information failures (58.4%), while 41.6% demonstrated a lack of shared understanding. Of the 179 identified outcomes, 38.0% were delays in care, 20.1% were physical harm, and 8.9% were dissatisfaction. There was no statistically significant association between failure type category and patient outcomes. Conclusion It was found that incident reports could identify specific types of communication failures and patient outcomes. This work provides a basis for future intervention development to prevent communication-related adverse events by tailoring interventions to specific types of failures.