Dataset Information

Quality of Care Delivered Before vs After a Quality-Improvement Intervention for Acute Geriatric Trauma.

ABSTRACT: Older trauma-injury patients had improved recovery after we implemented routine geriatric consultation for patients aged 65 years and older admitted to the trauma service of a Level I academic trauma center. The intervention aimed to improve quality of geriatric care. However, the specific care processes that improved are unknown.We conducted a prospective observation comparing medical care after (December 2007 to November 2009) vs before (December 2006 to November 2007) implementation of the geriatric consult-based intervention. To measure quality of care (QOC), we used 33 previously validated care-process quality indicators (QIs) from the Assessing the Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE) study, measured by review of medical records for 76 geriatric consult (GC) vs 71 control group patients. As prespecified subgroup analyses, we aggregated QIs by type: geriatric (eg, delirium screening) vs nongeriatric condition-based care (eg, thrombosis prophylaxis) and compared QI scores by type of care. Last, we aggregated QI scores into overall, geriatric, and nongeriatric QOC scores for each patient (number of QIs passed/number of QIs eligible), and compared patient-level QOC for the GC vs control group, adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidity, and injury severity.Sixty-three percent of the GC patients vs 11% of the control group patients received a geriatric consultation. We evaluated 2,505 QIs overall (1,664 geriatric type and 841 nongeriatric QIs). In general, fewer geriatric-type QIs were passed than nongeriatric QIs (71% vs 81%; p < 0.001). We provided better overall QOC to the GC (77%) than control group patients (73%; p < 0.05). However, the difference was not statistically significant after multivariable adjustment (p = 0.08). We improved geriatric QOC for the GC (74%) compared with the control group (68%; p < 0.01), a difference that was significant after multivariable adjustment (p = 0.01).Geriatricians and surgeons can collaboratively improve geriatric QOC for older trauma patients.

SUBMITTER: Min L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4409474 | biostudies-literature | 2015 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quality of Care Delivered Before vs After a Quality-Improvement Intervention for Acute Geriatric Trauma.

Min Lillian L Cryer Henry H Chan Chiao-Li CL Roth Carol C Tillou Areti A

Journal of the American College of Surgeons 20150109 5

<h4>Background</h4>Older trauma-injury patients had improved recovery after we implemented routine geriatric consultation for patients aged 65 years and older admitted to the trauma service of a Level I academic trauma center. The intervention aimed to improve quality of geriatric care. However, the specific care processes that improved are unknown.<h4>Study design</h4>We conducted a prospective observation comparing medical care after (December 2007 to November 2009) vs before (December 2006 to ...[more]

PMID: 25840534

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess respectful maternity care (RMC) in health facilities.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingForty-three (43) facilities across 15 districts in Bangladesh, 16 in Ghana and 12 in Tanzania.ParticipantsFacility managers; 325 providers (nurses/midwives/doctors)-Bangladesh (158), Ghana (86) and Tanzania (81); and 849 recently delivered women-Bangladesh (295), Ghana (381) and Tanzania (173)-were interviewed. Observation of 641 client-provider interactions was conducted-Bangladesh (387), Ghana (134) and Tanzania (120).AssessmentTrained social scientists and clinicians assessed infrastructure, policies, provision and women's experiences of RMC (emotional support, respectful care and communication).Primary outcomeRMC provided and/or experienced by women.ResultsThree (20%) facilities in Bangladesh, four (25%) in Ghana and three (25%) in Tanzania had no maternity clients' toilets and one-half had no handwashing facilities. Policies for RMC such as identification of client abuses were available: 81% (Ghana), 73% (Bangladesh) and 50% (Tanzania), but response was poor. Ninety-four (60%) Bangladeshi, 26 (30%) Ghanaian and 20 (25%) Tanzanian providers were not RMC trained. They provided emotional support during labour care to 107 (80%) women in Ghana, 95 (79%) in Tanzania and 188 (48.5%) in Bangladesh, and were often courteous with them-236 (61%) in Bangladesh, 119 (89%) in Ghana and 108 (90%) in Tanzania. Due to structural challenges, 169 (44%) women in Bangladesh, 49 (36%) in Ghana and 77 (64%) in Tanzania had no privacy during labour. Care was refused to 13 (11%) Tanzanian and 2 Bangladeshi women who could not pay illegal charges. Twenty-five (7%) women in Ghana, nine (6%) in Bangladesh and eight (5%) in Tanzania were verbally abused during care. Providers in all countries highly rated their care provision (95%-100%), and 287 (97%) of Bangladeshi women, 368 (97%) Ghanaians and 152 (88%) Tanzanians reported 'satisfaction' with the care they received. However, based on their facility experiences, significant (p<0.001) percentages-20% (Ghana) to 57% (Bangladesh)-will not return to the same facilities for future childbirth.ConclusionsFacilities in Bangladesh, Ghana and Tanzania have foundational systems that facilitate RMC. Structural inadequacies and policy gaps pose challenges. Many women were, however, unwilling to return to the same facilities for future deliveries although they (and providers) highly rated these facilities.

Project description:IntroductionImprovements in life expectancy imply that an increase of geriatric trauma patients occurs. These patients require special attention due to their multiple comorbidity issues. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the implementation of geriatric comanagement (GC) on the allocation and clinical outcome of geriatric trauma patients.MethodsThis observational cohort study aims to compare the demographic development and the clinical outcome in geriatric trauma patients (aged 70 years and older) before and after implementation of a certified geriatric trauma center (GC). Geriatric trauma patients admitted between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2010 were stratified to group pre-GC and admissions between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018 to Group post-GC. We excluded patients requiring end-of-life treatment and those who died within 24 h or due to severe traumatic brain injury. Outcome parameters included demographic changes, medical complexity (measured by American Society of Anaesthesiology Score (ASA) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)), in-hospital mortality and length of hospitalization.ResultsThis study includes 626 patients in Group pre-GC (mean age 80.3 ± 6.7 years) and 841 patients in Group post-GC (mean age 81.1 ± 7.3 years). Group pre-GC included 244 (39.0%) males, group post-GC included 361 (42.9%) males. The mean CCI was 4.7 (± 1.8) points in pre-GC and 5.1 (± 2.0) points in post-GC (p <0.001). In Group pre-GC, 100 patients (16.0%) were stratified as ASA 1 compared with 47 patients (5.6%) in Group post-GC (p <0.001). Group pre-GC had significantly less patients stratified as ASA 3 or higher (n = 235, 37.5%) compared with Group post-GC (n = 389, 46.3%, p <0.001). Length of stay (LOS) decreased significantly from 10.4 (± 20.3) days in Group pre-GC to 7.9 (±22.9) days in Group post-GC (p = 0.011). The 30-day mortality rate was comparable amongst these groups (pre-GC 8.8% vs. post-GC 8.9%).ConclusionThis study appears to support the implementation of a geriatric trauma center, as certain improvements in the patient care were found: Despite a higher CCI and a higher number of patients with higher ASA classifications, Hospital LOS, complication rates and mortality did were not increased after implementation of the CG. The increase in the case numbers supports the fact that a higher degree of specialization leads to a response by admitting physicians, as it exceeded the expectable trend of demographic ageing. We feel that a larger data base, hopefully in a multi center set up should be undertaken to verify these results.

Project description:Contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after percutaneous coronary interventions and is a patient safety objective of the National Quality Forum. However, no formal quality improvement program to prevent CI-AKI has been conducted. Therefore, we sought to determine whether a 6-year regional multicenter quality improvement intervention could reduce CI-AKI after percutaneous coronary interventions.We conducted a prospective multicenter quality improvement study to prevent CI-AKI (serum creatinine increase ?0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours or ?50% during hospitalization) among 21 067 nonemergent patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions at 10 hospitals between 2007 and 2012. Six intervention hospitals participated in the quality improvement intervention. Two hospitals with significantly lower baseline rates of CI-AKI, which served as benchmark sites and were used to develop the intervention, and 2 hospitals not receiving the intervention were used as controls. Using time series analysis and multilevel poisson regression clustering to the hospital level, we calculated adjusted risk ratios for CI-AKI comparing the intervention period to baseline. Adjusted rates of CI-AKI were significantly reduced in hospitals receiving the intervention by 21% (risk ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.93; P=0.005) for all patients and by 28% in patients with baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) (risk ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.56-0.91; P=0.007). Benchmark hospitals had no significant changes in CI-AKI. Key qualitative system factors associated with improvement included multidisciplinary teams, limiting contrast volume, standardized fluid orders, intravenous fluid bolus, and patient education about oral hydration.Simple cost-effective quality improvement interventions can prevent ?1 in 5 CI-AKI events in patients with undergoing nonemergent percutaneous coronary interventions.

Dataset Information

Quality of Care Delivered Before vs After a Quality-Improvement Intervention for Acute Geriatric Trauma.

Publications

Quality of Care Delivered Before vs After a Quality-Improvement Intervention for Acute Geriatric Trauma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets