Search

Background: Injury is the leading cause of death in people under 45 years of age in the United States; however, how care decisions occur in critical injury is poorly understood. This exploratory study sought to generate hypotheses about how care decisions are made among interdisciplinary providers caring for patients who have been critically injured., Methods: This was a qualitative study conducted at two intensive care units in a level 1 trauma center in an urban, teaching, safety-net hospital. Semistructured interviews consisted of case scenarios with competing clinical priorities presented to 25 interdisciplinary providers, elucidating how decisions are approached. Responses were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Thematic analysis was conducted to discover central themes. Category formulation and sorting was done for data reduction and thematic structuring of the data. The range and central tendency of these themes are reported., Results: The central theme for how care decisions are made among interdisciplinary providers was through the distribution of shared responsibility. The distribution of shared responsibility depended on interdisciplinary communication to navigate the two subthemes of time and roles. Time had to be navigated carefully, because it was both an opportunity for data acquisition and consensus building but also a pressure to decisively progress care. Roles were distinct but interchangeable and consisted of experts, actualizers, and questioners., Conclusion: Care decisions are made in the context of shared responsibility among interdisciplinary providers. Interdisciplinary communication is a means of establishing roles and navigating time to distribute shared responsibility among interdisciplinary providers., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: Emergency department (ED) visits for syncope are common and routine diagnostic testing is frequently low yield. Our objective is to determine whether recent guidelines emphasizing limiting hospitalization and advanced diagnostic testing to high-risk patients have changed patterns of syncope care., Methods: This was a retrospective population epidemiology study of syncope-related ED visits and hospitalizations using the National Emergency Department Sample from 2006 to 2014 and the State Inpatient Databases and Emergency Department Databases from 2009 and 2013. Primary outcomes were annual incidence rates of syncope ED visits and subsequent hospitalizations, and rates of hospitalization, observation, 30-day revisits, and diagnostic testing comparing 2009 with 2013. Differences were estimated with multivariable logistic regression modeling adjusted for patient clinical and demographic characteristics., Results: From 2006 to 2014, we identified 15,154,920 survey-weighted ED visits for syncope. Annual rates of ED visits increased from 643 to 771 per 100,000 adults, whereas hospitalizations declined from 36.3% to 24.7% (-11.6% absolute difference; 95% confidence interval [CI] -13.0% to -10.2%). In multistate adjusted analyses, the proportion of ED visits resulting in hospital admission decreased 11.7% (95% CI -11.9% to -11.6%) between 2009 and 2013, whereas the proportion of ED visits resulting in observation care increased by 7.9% (95% CI 7.8% to 8.0%), with no significant change in 30-day ED revisit rates (absolute difference 0.1%; 95% CI -0.1% to 0.3%). The frequency of advanced cardiac testing increased from 13.8% to 17.0%, and neuroimaging increased from 40.6% to 44.3%, driven by increased testing of patients receiving observation and inpatient care., Conclusion: Although the incidence of ED visits for syncope has increased, hospitalization rates have declined, without an adverse effect on ED revisits, possibly because of increased use of observation care. Use of advanced cardiac testing and neuroimaging has increased, driven by growth in testing of patients receiving observation and inpatient care., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate ROP screening rates in a population-based cohort; and to identify characteristics of patients that were missed., Study Design: We used the California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative data from 2005-2007 for a cross-sectional study. Using eligibility criteria, screening rates were calculated for each hospital. Multivariable regression was used to assess associations between patient clinical and sociodemographic factors and the odds of missing screening., Results: Overall rates of missed ROP screening decreased from 18.6% in 2005 to 12.8% in 2007. Higher gestational age (OR = 1.25 for increase of 1 week, 95% CI, 1.21-1.29), higher birth weight (OR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.10-1.15), and singleton birth (OR = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.07-1.34) were associated with higher probability of missing screening. Level II neonatal intensive care units and neonatal intensive care units with lower volume were more likely to miss screenings., Conclusion: Although ROP screening rates improved over time, larger and older infants are at risk for not receiving screening. Furthermore, large variations in screening rates exist among hospitals in California. Identification of gaps in quality of care creates an opportunity to improve ROP screening rates and prevent impaired vision in this vulnerable population., (Copyright © 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)