Dataset Information

Trauma video review utilization: A survey of practice in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Trauma video review (TVR) for quality improvement and education in the United States has been described for nearly three decades. The most recent information on this practice indicated a declining prevalence. We hypothesized that TVR utilization has increased since most recent estimates.

Methods

We conducted a survey of TVR practices at level I and level II US trauma centers. We distributed an electronic survey covering past, current, and future TVR utilization to the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma membership.

Results

45.0% of US level I and level II trauma centers completed surveys. 71/249 centers (28.5%) had active TVR programs. The use of TVR did not differ between level I and level II centers (28.8% vs. 27.8%, p = 0.87). Respondents using TVR were overwhelmingly positive about its perception (median score 8, [IQR 6-9]; 10 = 'best') at their institutions.

Conclusions

TVR use at Level I centers has increased over the past decade. Increased TVR utilization may form the basis for multicenter studies comparing processes of care during trauma resuscitation.

SUBMITTER: Dumas RP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8428979 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Practicing clinical nephrologists are performing fewer diagnostic kidney biopsies. Requiring biopsy procedural competence for graduating nephrology fellows is controversial. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS:An anonymous, on-line survey of all Walter Reed training program graduates (n=82; 1985-2017) and all United States nephrology program directors (n=149; August to October of 2017), regarding kidney biopsy practice and training, was undertaken. RESULTS:Walter Reed graduates' response and completion rates were 71% and 98%, respectively. The majority felt adequately trained in native kidney biopsy (83%), transplant biopsy (82%), and tissue interpretation (78%), with no difference for ≤10 versus >10 practice years. Thirty-five percent continued to perform biopsies (13% did ≥10 native biopsies/year); 93% referred at least some biopsies. The most common barriers to performing biopsy were logistics (81%) and time (74%). Program director response and completion rates were 60% and 77%. Seventy-two percent cited ≥1 barrier to fellow competence. The most common barriers were logistics (45%), time (45%), and likelihood that biopsy would not be performed postgraduation (41%). Fifty-one percent indicated that fellows should not be required to demonstrate minimal procedural competence in biopsy, although 97% agreed that fellows should demonstrate competence in knowing/managing indications, contraindications, and complications. Program directors citing ≥1 barrier or whose fellows did <50 native biopsies/year in total were more likely to think that procedural competence should not be required versus those citing no barriers (P=0.02), or whose fellows performed ≥50 biopsies (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Almost two-thirds of graduate respondents from a single military training program no longer perform biopsy, and 51% of responding nephrology program directors indicated that biopsy procedural competence should not be required. These findings should inform discussion of kidney biopsy curriculum requirements.

Project description:Rapid sequence induction and intubation (RSII) is a technique commonly used to resist regurgitation of gastric contents and protect the airway. A modification of this technique is implemented in certain clinical circumstances. However, there is currently no standard definition for a modified RSII. Therefore, we surveyed clinicians at academic centers across the United States to establish a working definition of a modified RSII as well as the clinical scenarios in which it is being used.A survey was created that queried the use and definition of modified RSII, and validated with test respondents. We then mailed the survey to all 131 anesthesia residency training programs across the United States. Logistic regression models were created to estimate the percentage of affirmative responses among respondents that performed modified RSII procedures and answered survey items in a consistent manner. Similar quantities were calculated by physician status (resident and attending).Four hundred ninety surveys were received from 58 institutions (44% institution response rate); 93% of respondents reported using a modified RSII, and of those 85% consistently completed the survey instrument. A majority of respondents (71%, CI: 63%-77%) reported administering oxygen before anesthesia induction, applying cricoid pressure, and attempting to ventilate the lungs via a facemask before securing the airway. Respondents noted that they would use a modified RSII procedure if the patient were either moderately or morbidly obese (each ?59%, 53%-64%), had a history but no current symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (52%, 46%-57%), had a hiatal hernia (42%, 36%-48%) or were a trauma patient who had been NPO for at least 8 h (39%, 33%-45%). Similar RSII results were obtained when repeating the analysis on the subset that did not enforce the consistency requirements.Based on our survey we have established three defining features of a modified RSII: (1) oxygen administration before induction; (2) the use of cricoid pressure; and (3) an attempt to ventilate the patient's lungs before securing the airway. Although this definition seems intuitively obvious, no previous work has tested whether it is commonly accepted.

Project description:Background:Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has emerged as an important modality for the treatment of intracranial metastases. There are currently few established guidelines delineating indications for SRS use and fewer still regarding plan evaluation in the treatment of multiple brain metastases. Methods:An 18 question electronic survey was distributed to radiation oncologists at National Cancer Institute (NCI) designated cancer centers in the USA (60). Centers without radiation oncologists were excluded. Physicians who indicated that they do not prescribe SRS were excluded from the remaining survey questions. Sign test and Chi-square test were used to determine if responses differed significantly from random distribution. Results:One hundred sixteen of the 697 radiation oncologists surveyed completed the questionnaire, representing 51 institutions. Sixty-two percent reported treating patients with brain metastases using SRS. Radiation oncologists prescribing SRS most commonly treat CNS (66.2%) and lung (49.3%) malignancies. SRS was used more frequently for < 10 brain metastases (73.7%; p < 0.0001) and whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) for > 10 brain metastases (82.5%; p < 0.0001). The maximum number of lesions physicians were willing to treat with SRS without WBRT was 1-4 (40.4%) and 5-10 (42.4%) (p < 0.0001 compared to 11-15, 16-20 and no limit). The most important criteria for choosing SRS or WBRT were number of lesions (p < 0.0001) and performance status (p = 0.016). The most common margin for SRS was 0 mm (49.1%; p = 0.0021). The most common dose constraints other than critical structure was conformity index (84.2%) and brain V12 (61.4%). The LINAC was the most common treatment modality (54.4%) and mono-isocenter technique for multiple brain metastases was commonly used (43.9%; p = 0.23). Most departments do not have a policy for brain metastases treatment (64.9%; p = 0.024). Conclusions:This is one of the first national surveys assessing the use of SRS for brain metastases in clinical practice. These data highlight some clinical considerations for physicians treating brain metastases with SRS.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Feldenkrais Method® teachers help students improve function and quality of life through verbally and manually guided lessons. The reasons people seek Feldenkrais® lessons are poorly understood. Similarly, little is known about practice characteristics and patterns. To address these knowledge gaps, we conducted an extensive survey of United States Guild Certified Feldenkrais Teachers®. METHODS: We invited all Feldenkrais Teachers to participate in this survey delivered in web-based or print formats. We obtained overall and question-specific response rates, descriptive statistics, chi-square tests of response bias, and performed qualitative thematic review of comments. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 30.5% (392/1287). Ninety percent of responders had college degrees in diverse fields; 12.5% had credentials outside health care, 36.9% held conventional health care licenses, and 23.1% had complementary and alternative medicine credentials. Mean age was 55.7 years; most teachers were women (83%). California (n = 100) and New York (n = 34) had the most teachers. Forty-five percent of teachers earned ≤ 20% of their gross income from their practices, while 26% earned > 80%. Most saw < 10 students/week for individual lessons and < 10 students/week for group lessons. Students were mostly women (71.1%) and 45-64 years old. The primary reason students sought Feldenkrais lessons was pain. A quarter of students self-referred, a fifth were referred by conventional health care providers, and two-thirds paid for services directly. Themes from comments included: beliefs that Feldenkrais training had important personal and professional benefits for teachers; recognition of the challenges of operating small businesses and succinctly describing the Feldenkrais Method; the variety of practice approaches; and a deep commitment to the Feldenkrais Method. CONCLUSIONS: Most Feldenkrais Teachers were well educated, often held additional credentials, were located in the West, were women, were older than 50 years, and had part-time practices. Most students were women, were adults, came from various referral sources, and paid directly for services. Teachers and students utilized the Feldenkrais Method in diverse settings and applications. These findings may foster practice development by Feldenkrais Teachers, improve communication between health care consumers and providers and assist decision-making, and stimulate more research concerning the Feldenkrais Method.