Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: Comparing factors and outcomes associated with ineligibility for PCI between inpatients and outpatients following ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) suggests specific PCI STEMI protocols that anticipate and overcome types of inelIGibility and delay for cardiac catheterization may improve outcomes.
Abstract: Objectives
Without early revascularization, both inpatient and outpatient STEMIs have poor outcomes. Reasons for denying PCI for STEMI, however, remain uncertain. This single-center retrospective cohort study compares factors and outcomes associated with ineligibility for PCI between inpatients and outpatients following ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
Methods
A total of 1,759 STEMI patients between June 2009 and January 2015 were assessed. Individual medical records were reviewed to obtain reasons for PCI ineligibility for STEMI patients who did not receive reperfusion therapy.
Results
Compared to outpatients with STEMI (n = 1,688), inpatients (n = 71) were less likely to receive coronary angiography (60.6% vs 95.9%; P < 0.001) or PCI (50.7% vs 80.9%; P < 0.001), with longer ECG/door to first device activation times (97 [78, 131] vs 63 [49, 78] minutes; P < 0.001). When coronary angiography was performed, however, similar rates of PCI and procedural success were seen in both groups. Principal contraindication for PCI was risk of bleeding within the inpatient population and complex coronary artery disease within the outpatient population. Total in-hospital mortality was higher in inpatient STEMIs compared to outpatients (42.2% vs 10.0%; P < 0.001), but lower for patients eligible for PCI in both groups.
Conclusions
Reasons for PCI ineligibility differ between inpatient and outpatient STEMIs. Inpatients have increased risks of bleeding, lower coronary angiography and PCI use, and higher in-hospital mortality. Especially for inpatients, specific PCI STEMI protocols that anticipate and overcome types of ineligibility and delay for cardiac catheterization may improve outcomes.
7 citations
••
TL;DR: As health care systems face increasing pressures to reduce readmissions and avoid CMS HRRP financial penalties, study results indicate the importance of including behavioral health data from EMRs and screening assessments for all inpatients to improve discharge planning and patient outcomes.
Abstract: Improving the ability to predict which patients are at increased risk for readmission can lead to more effective interventions and greater compliance with CMS Hospital Readmissions Reducti...
6 citations
••
TL;DR: A pharmacist driven ATO with physician support during multidisciplinary daily rounds reduced antibiotic use and could be expanded house-wide and serve as a model to improve antimicrobial stewardship in community, non-teaching hospitals.
Abstract: Abstract Background An antibiotic time out (ATO) at 48–72 hours is a critical component of antimicrobial stewardship programs to improve judicious antibiotic use. It is a strategy to prompt clinicians to re-evaluate antibiotic appropriateness including the need for de-escalation and discontinuation. Sharp Memorial Hospital is a tertiary community hospital with 437 beds and 48 Intensive Care Unit (ICU) beds. In May 2016, an ATO program was initiated in the ICU along with the implementation of multidisciplinary daily Medical ICU rounds 5 days a week led by an intensivist. Methods We conducted a pre- and post-intervention study to assess the impact of an ATO on utilization of targeted antibiotics (see Table 1). Pharmacists received mandatory education on the components of an ATO, a reference guidebook, and completed a baseline competency prior to ATO implementation. An on demand report was used to identify patients on antibiotic day > 2. A form prompting review of indication, culture results, de-escalation, treatment duration and proton-pump inhibitor appropriateness was completed as part of the daily workflow. Interventions were discussed during rounds or by contacting the physician. Metrics included days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient days, and intervention numbers, types, and acceptance rates (AR) during two 9-month periods: pre- and post-implementation. Results There were 829 interventions during the post-implementation period with a 96% AR compared with 83 during the pre-intervention period with a 94% AR. Antibiotic discontinuations and de-escalations comprised 52% of accepted interventions. There was a significant reduction in the use of vancomycin and quinolones with no change in anti-pseudomonal β-lactam use (see Table 1). Table 1. DOT per 1,000 patient days July 2015– March 2016 July 2016– March 2017 P-value Vancomycin IV 122.29 103.05 0.0001 Levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin 70.07 41.50 0 Cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam aztreonam, meropenem 257.13 249.83 0.3626 Conclusion A pharmacist driven ATO with physician support during multidisciplinary daily rounds reduced antibiotic use and could be expanded house-wide. This strategy could serve as a model to improve antimicrobial stewardship in community, non-teaching hospitals. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.
6 citations
••
St. Agnes Hospital1, University of North Dakota2, MedStar Washington Hospital Center3, Wake Forest University4, University of Maryland, Baltimore5, University of Pittsburgh6, Sharp HealthCare7, Autonomous University of Barcelona8, Kaiser Permanente9, St George's Hospital10, Louisiana State University in Shreveport11, University of Crete12, Institut Gustave Roussy13, Creighton University14, University of Lyon15, Complutense University of Madrid16, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center17, Mercy Medical Center (Baltimore, Maryland)18, Charité19, Rutgers University20, Roswell Park Cancer Institute21, University of South Florida22, Baylor University Medical Center23, Uppsala University24, University of Washington25, University of Louisville26, Christiana Care Health System27, National Institutes of Health28, University of Regensburg29, Mount Sinai St. Luke's and Mount Sinai Roosevelt30, Maine Medical Center31, Miami Valley Hospital32, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center33, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research34, University of Minnesota35, Netherlands Cancer Institute36, University of Iowa37, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev38
6 citations
••
TL;DR: Health plans have used screening questionnaires and service-utilization–based criteria to identify high-risk Medicare patients since at least 1990 to find patients who might benefit from targeted services to improve clinical outcomes, reduce costs, and enhancesatisfaction.
6 citations
Authors
Showing all 207 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Barbara Riegel | 101 | 507 | 77674 |
Neil N. Finer | 71 | 316 | 23101 |
George Sakoulas | 55 | 202 | 13469 |
Cynthia Behling | 43 | 108 | 15553 |
Christine A. White | 36 | 78 | 13649 |
John J. Lamberti | 34 | 152 | 4048 |
Ivor Royston | 33 | 92 | 6618 |
Oliver Dorigo | 31 | 99 | 3644 |
Marianne E. Weiss | 29 | 99 | 2819 |
Walter P. Dembitsky | 28 | 71 | 3302 |
Jaynelle F. Stichler | 26 | 157 | 2348 |
Mark A. Slater | 25 | 39 | 2311 |
Brian E. Jaski | 25 | 50 | 3788 |
Beverly Carlson | 24 | 43 | 3807 |
Robert E. Sobol | 19 | 35 | 2105 |