scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Kathryn M. McDonald

Bio: Kathryn M. McDonald is an academic researcher from Stanford University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Patient safety & Health care. The author has an hindex of 52, co-authored 166 publications receiving 14242 citations. Previous affiliations of Kathryn M. McDonald include University of California, Berkeley & United States Department of Veterans Affairs.


Papers
More filters
01 Jan 2001
TL;DR: This project aimed to collect and critically review the existing evidence on practices relevant to improving patient safety and identify practices with the strongest supporting evidence that decrease the risks associated with hospitalization, critical care, or surgery.
Abstract: Objectives Patient safety has received increased attention in recent years, but mostly with a focus on the epidemiology of errors and adverse events, rather than on practices that reduce such events This project aimed to collect and critically review the existing evidence on practices relevant to improving patient safety Search strategy and selection criteria Patient safety practices were defined as those that reduce the risk of adverse events related to exposure to medical care across a range of diagnoses or conditions Potential patient safety practices were identified based on preliminary surveys of the literature and expert consultation This process resulted in the identification of 79 practices for review The practices focused primarily on hospitalized patients, but some involved nursing home or ambulatory patients Protocols specified the inclusion criteria for studies and the structure for evaluation of the evidence regarding each practice Pertinent studies were identified using various bibliographic databases (eg, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ABI/INFORM, INSPEC), targeted searches of the Internet, and communication with relevant experts Data collection and analysis Included literature consisted of controlled observational studies, clinical trials and systematic reviews found in the peer-reviewed medical literature, relevant non-health care literature and "gray literature" For most practices, the project team required that the primary outcome consist of a clinical endpoint (ie, some measure of morbidity or mortality) or a surrogate outcome with a clear connection to patient morbidity or mortality This criterion was relaxed for some practices drawn from the non-health care literature The evidence supporting each practice was summarized using a prospectively determined format The project team then used a predefined consensus technique to rank the practices according to the strength of evidence presented in practice summaries A separate ranking was developed for research priorities Main results Practices with the strongest supporting evidence are generally clinical interventions that decrease the risks associated with hospitalization, critical care, or surgery Many patient safety practices drawn primarily from nonmedical fields (eg, use of simulators, bar coding, computerized physician order entry, crew resource management) deserve additional research to elucidate their value in the health care environment The following 11 practices were rated most highly in terms of strength of the evidence supporting more widespread implementation Appropriate use of prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism in patients at risk; Use of perioperative beta-blockers in appropriate patients to prevent perioperative morbidity and mortality; Use of maximum sterile barriers while placing central intravenous catheters to prevent infections; Appropriate use of antibiotic prophylaxis in surgical patients to prevent postoperative infections; Asking that patients recall and restate what they have been told during the informed consent process; Continuous aspiration of subglottic secretions (CASS) to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia; Use of pressure relieving bedding materials to prevent pressure ulcers; Use of real-time ultrasound guidance during central line insertion to prevent complications; Patient self-management for warfarin (Coumadin) to achieve appropriate outpatient anticoagulation and prevent complications; Appropriate provision of nutrition, with a particular emphasis on early enteral nutrition in critically ill and surgical patients; and Use of antibiotic-impregnated central venous catheters to prevent catheter-related infections Conclusions An evidence-based approach can help identify practices that are likely to improve patient safety Such practices target a diverse array of safety problems Further research is needed to fill the substantial gaps in the evidentiary base, particularly with regard to the generalizability of patient safety practices heretofore tested only in limited settings and to promising practices drawn from industries outside of health care

1,556 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
26 Jul 2006-JAMA
TL;DR: Most QI strategies produced small to modest improvements in glycemic control, but team changes and case management showed more robust improvements, especially for interventions in which case managers could adjust medications without awaiting physician approval.
Abstract: ContextThere have been numerous reports of interventions designed to improve the care of patients with diabetes, but the effectiveness of such interventions is unclearObjectiveTo assess the impact on glycemic control of 11 distinct strategies for quality improvement (QI) in adults with type 2 diabetesData Sources and Study SelectionMEDLINE (1966-April 2006) and the Cochrane Collaboration's Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group database, which covers multiple bibliographic databases Eligible studies included randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials and controlled before-after studies that evaluated a QI intervention targeting some aspect of clinician behavior or organizational change and reported changes in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) valuesData ExtractionPostintervention difference in HbA1c values were estimated using a meta-regression model that included baseline glycemic control and other key intervention and study features as predictorsData SynthesisFifty randomized controlled trials, 3 quasi-randomized trials, and 13 controlled before-after trials met all inclusion criteria Across these 66 trials, interventions reduced HbA1c values by a mean of 042% (95% confidence interval [CI], 029%-054%) over a median of 13 months of follow-up Trials with fewer patients than the median for all included trials reported significantly greater effects than did larger trials (061% vs 027%, P = 004), strongly suggesting publication bias Trials with mean baseline HbA1c values of 80% or greater also reported significantly larger effects (054% vs 020%, P = 005) Adjusting for these effects, 2 of the 11 categories of QI strategies were associated with reductions in HbA1c values of at least 050%: team changes (067%; 95% CI, 043%-091%; n = 26 trials) and case management (052%; 95% CI, 031%-073%; n = 26 trials); these also represented the only 2 strategies conferring significant incremental reductions in HbA1c values Interventions involving team changes reduced values by 033% more (95% CI, 012%-054%; P = 004) than those without this strategy, and those involving case management reduced values by 022% more (95% CI, 000%-044%; P = 04) than those without case management Interventions in which nurse or pharmacist case managers could make medication adjustments without awaiting physician authorization reduced values by 080% (95% CI, 051%-110%), vs only 032% (95% CI, 014%-049%) for all other interventions (P = 002)ConclusionsMost QI strategies produced small to modest improvements in glycemic control Team changes and case management showed more robust improvements, especially for interventions in which case managers could adjust medications without awaiting physician approval Estimates of the effectiveness of other specific QI strategies may have been limited by difficulty in classifying complex interventions, insufficient numbers of studies, and publication bias

719 citations

01 Jun 2007
TL;DR: A working definition of care coordination is developed, applied to a review of systematic reviews, and theoretical frameworks that might predict or explain how care coordination mechanisms are influenced by factors in the health care setting and how they relate to patient outcomes and health care costs are identified.
Abstract: Context Quality problems and spiraling costs have resulted in widespread interest in solutions that improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the health care system. Care coordination has been identified by the Institute of Medicine as one of the key strategies for potentially accomplishing these improvements. Objectives The objectives of this project were to develop a working definition of care coordination, apply it to a review of systematic reviews, and identify theoretical frameworks that might predict or explain how care coordination mechanisms are influenced by factors in the health care setting and how they relate to patient outcomes and health care costs. Data Sources and Review Methods We used literature databases, Internet searches, and personal contacts to assemble background information on ongoing care coordination programs; potential definitions; conceptual frameworks and related empirical evidence; and care coordination measures. We also conducted literature searches through September 30, 2006 of MEDLINE®, and November 15, 2006 for CINAHL®, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, American College of Physicians Journal Club, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, PsychInfo, Sociological Abstracts, and Social Services Abstracts to identify systematic reviews of care coordination interventions. We excluded systematic reviews with a narrow focus, namely those conducted solely in the inpatient setting, or where the only two participants involved in care were the patient and a health care provider. Results We identified numerous ongoing programs in the private and public sector, most of which have not yet been evaluated. We identified over 40 definitions of care coordination and related terminology, and developed a working definition drawing together common elements: Care coordination is the deliberate organization of patient care activities between two or more participants (including the patient) involved in a patient's care to facilitate the appropriate delivery of health care services. Organizing care involves the marshalling of personnel and other resources needed to carry out all required patient care activities, and is often managed by the exchange of information among participants responsible for different aspects of care. We used this definition to develop our inclusion/exclusion criteria for selecting potentially relevant systematic reviews. Our literature search yielded 4,730 publications, of which 75 systematic reviews evaluating care coordination interventions, either fully or as a part of the review, met inclusion criteria. From these, we identified 20 different coordination interventions (e.g., multidisciplinary teams, case management, disease management) covering 12 clinical populations (e.g., mental health, heart disease, diabetes) and conducted in multiple settings (e.g., outpatient, community, home). Finally, we identified four conceptual frameworks (Andersen's behavioral framework, Donabedian's structure-process-outcome framework, Nadler/Tushman and others' Organizational design framework with Wagner's Chronic Care Model provided as an example of such design, and Gittell's Relational coordination framework) with potential applicability to studying care coordination by assessing baseline characteristics of the environment, specific coordination mechanism alternatives, and outcomes. The strongest evidence shows benefit of care coordination interventions for patients who have congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, severe mental illness, a recent stroke, or depression, though evidence about key intervention components is lacking. Conclusions Care coordination interventions represent a wide range of approaches at the service delivery and systems level. Their effectiveness is most likely dependent upon appropriate matching between intervention and care coordination problem, though more conceptual, empirical and experimental research is required to explore this hypothesis.

660 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Recommendations for achieving transparency and validation are described, developed by a task force appointed by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and the Society for Medical Decision Making (SMDM).
Abstract: Trust and confidence are critical to the success of health care models. There are two main methods for achieving this: transparency (people can see how the model is built) and validation (how well the model reproducesreality).Thisreportdescribesrecommendationsforachieving transparency and validation developed by a taskforce appointed by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes ResearchandtheSocietyforMedicalDecisionMaking.Recommendations were developed iteratively by the authors. A nontechnical description—including model type, intended applications, funding sources, structure, intended uses, inputs, outputs, other components that determine function, and their relationships, data sources, validation methods, results, and limitations—should be made available to anyone. Technical documentation, written in sufficient detail to enable a reader with necessary expertise to evaluate the model and potentially reproduce it, should be made available openly or under agreements that protect intellectual property, at the discretion of the modelers. Validation involves face validity (wherein experts evaluate model structure, data sources, assumptions, and results), verification or internal validity (check accuracy of coding), cross validity (comparison of results with other models analyzing the same problem), external validity (comparing model results with real-world results), and predictive validity (comparing model results with prospectively observed events). The last two are the strongest form of validation. Each section of this

602 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Giuseppe Mancia1, Robert Fagard, Krzysztof Narkiewicz, Josep Redon, Alberto Zanchetti, Michael Böhm, Thierry Christiaens, Renata Cifkova, Guy De Backer, Anna F. Dominiczak, Maurizio Galderisi, Diederick E. Grobbee, Tiny Jaarsma, Paulus Kirchhof, Sverre E. Kjeldsen, Stéphane Laurent, Athanasios J. Manolis, Peter M. Nilsson, Luis M. Ruilope, Roland E. Schmieder, Per Anton Sirnes, Peter Sleight, Margus Viigimaa, Bernard Waeber, Faiez Zannad, Michel Burnier, Ettore Ambrosioni, Mark Caufield, Antonio Coca, Michael H. Olsen, Costas Tsioufis, Philippe van de Borne, José Luis Zamorano, Stephan Achenbach, Helmut Baumgartner, Jeroen J. Bax, Héctor Bueno, Veronica Dean, Christi Deaton, Çetin Erol, Roberto Ferrari, David Hasdai, Arno W. Hoes, Juhani Knuuti, Philippe Kolh2, Patrizio Lancellotti, Aleš Linhart, Petros Nihoyannopoulos, Massimo F Piepoli, Piotr Ponikowski, Juan Tamargo, Michal Tendera, Adam Torbicki, William Wijns, Stephan Windecker, Denis Clement, Thierry C. Gillebert, Enrico Agabiti Rosei, Stefan D. Anker, Johann Bauersachs, Jana Brguljan Hitij, Mark J. Caulfield, Marc De Buyzere, Sabina De Geest, Geneviève Derumeaux, Serap Erdine, Csaba Farsang, Christian Funck-Brentano, Vjekoslav Gerc, Giuseppe Germanò, Stephan Gielen, Herman Haller, Jens Jordan, Thomas Kahan, Michel Komajda, Dragan Lovic, Heiko Mahrholdt, Jan Östergren, Gianfranco Parati, Joep Perk, Jorge Polónia, Bogdan A. Popescu, Zeljko Reiner, Lars Rydén, Yuriy Sirenko, Alice Stanton, Harry A.J. Struijker-Boudier, Charalambos Vlachopoulos, Massimo Volpe, David A. Wood 
TL;DR: In this article, a randomized controlled trial of Aliskiren in the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Elderly people was presented. But the authors did not discuss the effect of the combination therapy in patients living with systolic hypertension.
Abstract: ABCD : Appropriate Blood pressure Control in Diabetes ABI : ankle–brachial index ABPM : ambulatory blood pressure monitoring ACCESS : Acute Candesartan Cilexetil Therapy in Stroke Survival ACCOMPLISH : Avoiding Cardiovascular Events in Combination Therapy in Patients Living with Systolic Hypertension ACCORD : Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes ACE : angiotensin-converting enzyme ACTIVE I : Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events ADVANCE : Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron-MR Controlled Evaluation AHEAD : Action for HEAlth in Diabetes ALLHAT : Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart ATtack ALTITUDE : ALiskiren Trial In Type 2 Diabetes Using Cardio-renal Endpoints ANTIPAF : ANgioTensin II Antagonist In Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation APOLLO : A Randomized Controlled Trial of Aliskiren in the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Elderly People ARB : angiotensin receptor blocker ARIC : Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities ARR : aldosterone renin ratio ASCOT : Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial ASCOT-LLA : Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial—Lipid Lowering Arm ASTRAL : Angioplasty and STenting for Renal Artery Lesions A-V : atrioventricular BB : beta-blocker BMI : body mass index BP : blood pressure BSA : body surface area CA : calcium antagonist CABG : coronary artery bypass graft CAPPP : CAPtopril Prevention Project CAPRAF : CAndesartan in the Prevention of Relapsing Atrial Fibrillation CHD : coronary heart disease CHHIPS : Controlling Hypertension and Hypertension Immediately Post-Stroke CKD : chronic kidney disease CKD-EPI : Chronic Kidney Disease—EPIdemiology collaboration CONVINCE : Controlled ONset Verapamil INvestigation of CV Endpoints CT : computed tomography CV : cardiovascular CVD : cardiovascular disease D : diuretic DASH : Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension DBP : diastolic blood pressure DCCT : Diabetes Control and Complications Study DIRECT : DIabetic REtinopathy Candesartan Trials DM : diabetes mellitus DPP-4 : dipeptidyl peptidase 4 EAS : European Atherosclerosis Society EASD : European Association for the Study of Diabetes ECG : electrocardiogram EF : ejection fraction eGFR : estimated glomerular filtration rate ELSA : European Lacidipine Study on Atherosclerosis ESC : European Society of Cardiology ESH : European Society of Hypertension ESRD : end-stage renal disease EXPLOR : Amlodipine–Valsartan Combination Decreases Central Systolic Blood Pressure more Effectively than the Amlodipine–Atenolol Combination FDA : U.S. Food and Drug Administration FEVER : Felodipine EVent Reduction study GISSI-AF : Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto Miocardico-Atrial Fibrillation HbA1c : glycated haemoglobin HBPM : home blood pressure monitoring HOPE : Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation HOT : Hypertension Optimal Treatment HRT : hormone replacement therapy HT : hypertension HYVET : HYpertension in the Very Elderly Trial IMT : intima-media thickness I-PRESERVE : Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Systolic Function INTERHEART : Effect of Potentially Modifiable Risk Factors associated with Myocardial Infarction in 52 Countries INVEST : INternational VErapamil SR/T Trandolapril ISH : Isolated systolic hypertension JNC : Joint National Committee JUPITER : Justification for the Use of Statins in Primary Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin LAVi : left atrial volume index LIFE : Losartan Intervention For Endpoint Reduction in Hypertensives LV : left ventricle/left ventricular LVH : left ventricular hypertrophy LVM : left ventricular mass MDRD : Modification of Diet in Renal Disease MRFIT : Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial MRI : magnetic resonance imaging NORDIL : The Nordic Diltiazem Intervention study OC : oral contraceptive OD : organ damage ONTARGET : ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial PAD : peripheral artery disease PATHS : Prevention And Treatment of Hypertension Study PCI : percutaneous coronary intervention PPAR : peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor PREVEND : Prevention of REnal and Vascular ENdstage Disease PROFESS : Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Secondary Strokes PROGRESS : Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study PWV : pulse wave velocity QALY : Quality adjusted life years RAA : renin-angiotensin-aldosterone RAS : renin-angiotensin system RCT : randomized controlled trials RF : risk factor ROADMAP : Randomized Olmesartan And Diabetes MicroAlbuminuria Prevention SBP : systolic blood pressure SCAST : Angiotensin-Receptor Blocker Candesartan for Treatment of Acute STroke SCOPE : Study on COgnition and Prognosis in the Elderly SCORE : Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation SHEP : Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program STOP : Swedish Trials in Old Patients with Hypertension STOP-2 : The second Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension SYSTCHINA : SYSTolic Hypertension in the Elderly: Chinese trial SYSTEUR : SYSTolic Hypertension in Europe TIA : transient ischaemic attack TOHP : Trials Of Hypertension Prevention TRANSCEND : Telmisartan Randomised AssessmeNt Study in ACE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease UKPDS : United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study VADT : Veterans' Affairs Diabetes Trial VALUE : Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation WHO : World Health Organization ### 1.1 Principles The 2013 guidelines on hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and the European Society of Cardiology …

14,173 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension : The Task Force for the management of Arterspertension of the European Society ofhypertension (ESH) and of theEuropean Society of Cardiology (ESC).
Abstract: 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension : The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

9,932 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension : The Task Force for the management of Arterspertension of the European Society ofhypertension (ESH) and of theEuropean Society of Cardiology (ESC).
Abstract: Because of new evidence on several diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of hypertension, the present guidelines differ in many respects from the previous ones. Some of the most important differences are listed below: 1. Epidemiological data on hypertension and BP control in Europe. 2. Strengthening of the prognostic value of home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) and of its role for diagnosis and management of hypertension, next to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). 3. Update of the prognostic significance of night-time BP, white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension. 4. Re-emphasis on integration of BP, cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, asymptomatic organ damage (OD) and clinical complications for total CV risk assessment. 5. Update of the prognostic significance of asymptomatic OD, including heart, blood vessels, kidney, eye and brain. 6. Reconsideration of the risk of overweight and target body mass index (BMI) in hypertension. 7. Hypertension in young people. 8. Initiation of antihypertensive treatment. More evidence-based criteria and no drug treatment of high normal BP. 9. Target BP for treatment. More evidence-based criteria and unified target systolic blood pressure (SBP) (<140 mmHg) in both higher and lower CV risk patients. 10. Liberal approach to initial monotherapy, without any all-ranking purpose. 11. Revised schema for priorital two-drug combinations. 12. New therapeutic algorithms for achieving target BP. 13. Extended section on therapeutic strategies in special conditions. 14. Revised recommendations on treatment of hypertension in the elderly. 15. Drug treatment of octogenarians. 16. Special attention to resistant hypertension and new treatment approaches. 17. Increased attention to OD-guided therapy. 18. New approaches to chronic management of hypertensive disease

7,018 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The current guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation are based on the findings of the ESC Task Force on 12 March 2015.
Abstract: ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation : The Task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

6,866 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The results indicated that feedback may be more effective when baseline performance is low, the source is a supervisor or colleague, it is provided more than once, and the role of context and the targeted clinical behaviour was assessed.
Abstract: Background Audit and feedback continues to be widely used as a strategy to improve professional practice. It appears logical that healthcare professionals would be prompted to modify their practice if given feedback that their clinical practice was inconsistent with that of their peers or accepted guidelines. Yet, audit and feedback has not been found to be consistently effective. Objectives To assess the effects of audit and feedback on the practice of healthcare professionals and patient outcomes. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group's register up to January 2001. This was supplemented with searches of MEDLINE and reference lists, which did not yield additional relevant studies. Selection criteria Randomised trials of audit and feedback (defined as any summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time) that reported objectively measured professional practice in a healthcare setting or healthcare outcomes. Data collection and analysis Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Quantitative (meta-regression), visual and qualitative analyses were undertaken. Main results We included 85 studies, 48 of which have been added to the previous version of this review. There were 52 comparisons of dichotomous outcomes from 47 trials with over 3500 health professionals that compared audit and feedback to no intervention. The adjusted RDs of non-compliance with desired practice varied from 0.09 (a 9% absolute increase in non-compliance) to 0.71 (a 71% decrease in non-compliance) (median = 0.07, inter-quartile range = 0.02 to 0.11). The one factor that appeared to predict the effectiveness of audit and feedback across studies was baseline non-compliance with recommended practice. Reviewer's conclusions Audit and feedback can be effective in improving professional practice. When it is effective, the effects are generally small to moderate. The absolute effects of audit and feedback are more likely to be larger when baseline adherence to recommended practice is low.

4,946 citations