Search

The quality of emergency department (ED) care for children in the US is highly variable. The National Pediatric Readiness Project aims to improve survival for children receiving emergency services. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of increasing ED pediatric readiness, using a decision-analytic simulation model. Previously published primary analyses of a nationally representative, population-based cohort of children receiving emergency services at 747 EDs in eleven states provided clinical and cost parameters. From a health care sector perspective, we used a 3 percent annual discount rate and quantified lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We performed probabilistic, one-way, and subgroup sensitivity analyses. Increasing ED pediatric readiness yields 69,100 QALYs for the eleven-state cohort, costing $9,300 per QALY gained. Achieving high readiness nationally yields 179,000 QALYs at the same ICER (with implementation costs of approximately $260 million). Implementing high ED pediatric readiness for all EDs in the US is highly cost-effective.

Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC) regulations detail specific circumstances in which Institutional Review Boards (IRB) can approve studies where obtaining informed consent is not possible prior to subject enrollment. To better understand how IRB members evaluate community consultation (CC) and public disclosure (PD) processes and results, semi-structured interviews of EFIC-experienced IRB members were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. Interviews with 11 IRB members revealed similar approaches to reviewing EFIC studies. Most use summaries of CC activities to determine community members' attitudes; none reported using specific criteria nor recalled any CC reviews that resulted in modifications to or denials of EFIC studies. Most interviewees thought metrics based on Community VOICES's domains (feasibility, participant selection, quality of communication, community perceptions, investigator/IRB perceptions) would be helpful. IRB members had similar experiences and concerns about reviewing EFIC studies. Development of metrics to assess CC processes may be useful to IRBs reviewing EFIC studies.

Study Objective: We assess the productivity, outcomes, and experiences of participants in the National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-funded K12 institutional research training programs in emergency care research., Methods: We used a mixed-methods study design to evaluate the 6 K12 programs, including 2 surveys, participant interviews, scholar publications, grant submissions, and funded grants. The training program lasted from July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2017. We tracked scholars for a minimum of 3 years and up to 5 years, beginning with date of entry into the program. We interviewed program participants by telephone using open-ended prompts., Results: There were 94 participants, including 43 faculty scholars, 13 principal investigators, 30 non-principal investigator primary mentors, and 8 program administrators. The survey had a 74% overall response rate, including 95% of scholars. On entry to the program, scholars were aged a median of 37 years (interquartile range [IQR] 34 to 40 years), with 16 women (37%), and represented 11 disciplines. Of the 43 scholars, 40 (93%) submitted a career development award or research project grant during or after the program; 26 (60%) have secured independent funding as of August 1, 2017. Starting with date of entry into the program, the median time to grant submission was 19 months (IQR 11 to 27 months) and time to funding was 33 months (IQR 27 to 39 months). Cumulative median publications per scholar increased from 7 (IQR 4 to 15.5) at program entry to 21 (IQR 11 to 33.5) in the first post-K12 year. We conducted 57 semistructured interviews and identified 7 primary themes., Conclusion: This training program produced 43 interdisciplinary investigators in emergency care research, with demonstrated productivity in grant funding and publications., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: The physician orders for life-sustaining treatment (POLST) paradigm allows health care professionals to document the treatment preferences of patients with advanced illness or frailty as portable and actionable medical orders. National standards encourage offering POLST orders to patients for whom clinicians would not be surprised if they died in the next year., Objectives: To determine the influence of cause of death on the timing of POLST form completion and on changes to POLST orders as death approaches., Methods: This was a cohort study of 18,285 Oregon POLST Registry decedents who died in 2010-2011 matched to Oregon death certificates., Results: The median interval between POLST completion and death was 6.4 weeks. Those dying of cancer had forms completed nearer death (median 5.1 weeks) than those with organ failure (10.6 weeks) or dementia (14.5 weeks; P < 0.001). More than 90% of final POLST forms indicated orders for no resuscitation and 65.1% listed orders for comfort measures only. Eleven percent of the sample had multiple registered forms during the two years preceding their death, with the form completed nearest to death more likely than earlier forms to have orders for no resuscitation and comfort measures only, although some later forms did have orders for more treatment., Conclusion: More than half of POLST forms were completed in the final two months of life. Cause of death influenced when POLST forms were completed. POLST forms changed in the two years preceding death, more frequently recording fewer life-sustaining treatment orders than the earlier form(s)., (Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) has become a common means of documenting patient treatment preferences. In addition to orders either for Attempt Resuscitation or Do Not Attempt Resuscitation, for patients not in cardiopulmonary arrest, POLST provides three levels of treatment: Full Treatment, Limited Interventions, and Comfort Measures Only. Oregon has an electronic registry for POLST forms completed in the state. We used registry data to examine the different combinations of treatment orders., Methods and Results: We analyzed data from forms signed and entered into the Oregon POLST Registry in 2012. The analysis included 31,294 POLST forms. The mean Registrant age was 76.7 years. 21,396 (68.4%) had Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNR) orders and 9900 (31.6%) had orders for "Attempt Resuscitation". The 6 order combinations were: Do Not Resuscitate (DNR)/Comfort Measures Only 10,769 (34.4%), DNR/Limited Interventions 9306 (29.7%), DNR/Full Treatment 1211 (3.9%), Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)/Comfort Measures Only 11 (0.04%), Attempt CPR/Limited Interventions 2281 (7.3%), and Attempt CPR/Full Treatment 7473 (23.9%)., Conclusions: The most common order combinations were DNR/Comfort Measures Only, DNR/Limited Interventions and Attempt Resuscitation/Full Treatment. These three makes sense to health professionals. However, other order combinations that require interpretation at the time of a crisis were completed for about 10% of Registrants. These combinations need further investigation., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)