A Survey of Academic Medical Centers to Distinguish Between Quality Improvement and Research Activities

2006 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 215-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nate Johnson ◽  
Lee Vermeulen ◽  
Kelly M. Smith





2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (12) ◽  
pp. 938-942
Author(s):  
Lydia Noh ◽  
Kristina Heimerl ◽  
Rita Shane

Abstract Purpose This multicenter quality improvement initiative aims to measure and quantify pharmacists’ impact on reducing medication-related acute care episodes (MACEs) for high-risk patients at an increased risk for readmission due to drug-related problems (DRPs). Methods This was a prospective, multicenter quality improvement initiative conducted at 9 academic medical centers. Each participant implemented a standardized methodology for evaluating MACE likelihood to demonstrate the impact of pharmacist postdischarge follow-up (PDFU). The primary outcome was MACEs prevented, and the secondary outcome was DRPs identified and resolved by pharmacists. During PDFU, pharmacists were responsible for identification and resolution of DRPs, and cases were reviewed by physicians to confirm whether potential MACEs were prevented. Results A total of 840 patients were contacted by 9 participating academic medical centers during a 6-week data collection period. Of these, 328 cases were identified as MACEs prevented during PDFU by pharmacists, and physician reviewers confirmed that pharmacist identification of DRPs during PDFU prevented 27.9% of readmissions. Pharmacist identified 959 DRPs, 2.8% (27) of which were identified as potentially life threatening. Potentially serious or significant DRPs made up 56.6% (543) of the DRPs, and 40.6% (389) were identified as having a low capacity for harm. Conclusion The results demonstrate that PDFU of high-risk patients reduces DRPs and prevents MACEs based on physician confirmation. Implementation of MACE methodology provides health-system pharmacy departments the ability to demonstrate pharmacists’ value in transitions of care and assist in expanding pharmacist services.



2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 287-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian F. Leas ◽  
Neil I. Goldfarb ◽  
Robert C. Browne ◽  
Mark Keroack ◽  
David B. Nash




Hand ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 155894471989881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taylor M. Pong ◽  
Wouter F. van Leeuwen ◽  
Kamil Oflazoglu ◽  
Philip E. Blazar ◽  
Neal Chen

Background: Total wrist arthroplasty (TWA) is a treatment option for many debilitating wrist conditions. With recent improvements in implant design, indications for TWA have broadened. However, despite these improvements, there are still complications associated with TWA, such as unplanned reoperation and eventual implant removal. The goal of this study was to identify risk factors for an unplanned reoperation or implant revision after a TWA at 2 academic medical centers between 2002 and 2015. Methods: In this retrospective study, 24 consecutive TWAs were identified using CPT codes. Medical records were manually reviewed to identify demographic, patient- or disease-related, and surgery-related risk factors for reoperation and implant removal after a primary TWA. Results: Forty-six percent of wrists (11 of 24 TWAs performed) had a reoperation after a median of 3.4 years, while 29% (7 of 24) underwent implant revision after a median of 5 years. Two patients had wrist surgery prior to their TWA, both eventually had their implant removed ( P = .08). There were no risk factors associated with reoperation or implant removal. Conclusion: Unplanned reoperation and implant removal after a primary TWA are common. Approximately 1 in 3 wrists are likely to undergo revision surgery. We found no factors associated with reoperation or implant removal; however, prior wrist surgery showed a trend toward risk of implant removal after TWA.



2017 ◽  
Vol 61 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 132-133
Author(s):  
J. Aaronson ◽  
S. Abramovitz ◽  
R. Smiley ◽  
V. Tangel ◽  
R. Landau


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document