scholarly journals Optimising neonatal service provision for preterm babies born between 27 and 31 weeks gestation in England (OPTI-PREM), using national data, qualitative research and economic analysis: a study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e029421
Author(s):  
Thillagavathie Pillay ◽  
Neena Modi ◽  
Oliver Rivero-Arias ◽  
Brad Manktelow ◽  
Sarah E Seaton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Preterm Births ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Neonatal Unit ◽  
Advisory Panel ◽  
Research Database ◽  
Link Type

IntroductionIn England, for babies born at 23–26 weeks gestation, care in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) as opposed to a local neonatal unit (LNU) improves survival to discharge. This evidence is shaping neonatal health services. In contrast, there is no evidence to guide location of care for the next most vulnerable group (born at 27–31 weeks gestation) whose care is currently spread between 45 NICU and 84 LNU in England. This group represents 12% of preterm births in England and over onr-third of all neonatal unit care days. Compared with those born at 23–26 weeks gestation, they account for four times more admissions and twice as many National Health Service bed days/year.MethodsIn this mixed-methods study, our primary objective is to assess, for babies born at 27–31 weeks gestation and admitted to a neonatal unit in England, whether care in an NICU vs an LNU impacts on survival and key morbidities (up to age 1 year), at each gestational age in weeks. Routinely recorded data extracted from real-time, point-of-care patient management systems held in the National Neonatal Research Database, Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics, for January 2014 to December 2018, will be analysed. Secondary objectives are to assess (1) whether differences in care provided, rather than a focus on LNU/NICU designation, drives gestation-specific outcomes, (2) where care is most cost-effective and (3) what parents’ and clinicians' perspectives are on place of care, and how these could guide clinical decision-making. Our findings will be used to develop recommendations, in collaboration with national bodies, to inform clinical practice, commissioning and policy-making. The project is supported by a parent advisory panel and a study steering committee.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics approval has been obtained (IRAS 212304). Dissemination will be through publication of findings and development of recommendations for care.Trial registration numberNCT02994849 and ISRCTN74230187.

scholarly journals Inpatient Biophysical Profiles and the Effect on Clinical Decision Making

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (04) ◽  
pp. e357-e361
Author(s):  
Diana A. Racusin ◽  
Suneet P. Chauhan ◽  
Baha Sibai ◽  
Han-Yang Chen ◽  
Nesochi Adimorah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Chart Review ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Fetal Monitoring ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Nicu Admission

Abstract Objective Our primary objective was to determine whether biophysical profiles (BPP) performed on the antepartum unit result in changes in clinical decision making. Study Design A retrospective cohort chart review was performed among women who had a BPP during hospital admission. BPP status was categorized as normal (8/8 points) and abnormal (6/8 or less points). The primary outcome, clinical decision making, was the need for prolonged external fetal monitoring (defined as > 2 hours) or decision to proceed with delivery. Secondary outcomes included mode of delivery, indicated preterm delivery, birth weight, 5-minute Apgar's score <7, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. Results Among our cohort (n = 186), 85.5% (n = 159) had a normal BPP. Delivery management was altered in one case (0.54%) by the BPP findings, and there were no BPPs that resulted in need for prolonged monitoring. Compared with women with normal BPP, women with abnormal BPPs were more likely to deliver at <37 weeks, to be admitted to the NICU, or have a 5-minute Apgar's score <7. Conclusion In-hospital BPPs alter clinical decision making in less than 1% of cases.

POCT errors can lead to false potassium results

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Buño ◽  
Paloma Oliver
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Clinical Intervention ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Whole Process ◽  
Severe Hyperkalemia ◽  
Wrong Diagnosis ◽  
Critical Patients

Abstract Point-of-care-testing (POCT) facilitates rapid availability of results that allows prompt clinical decision making. These results must be reliable and the whole process must not compromise its quality. Blood gas analyzers are one of the most used methods for POCT tests in Emergency Departments (ED) and in critical patients. Whole blood is the preferred sample, and we must be aware that hemolysis can occur. These devices cannot detect the presence of hemolysis in the sample, and because of the characteristics of the sample, we cannot visually detect it either. Hemolysis can alter the result of different parameters, including potassium with abnormal high results or masking low levels (hypokalemia) when reporting normal concentrations. Severe hyperkalemia is associated with the risk of potentially fatal cardiac arrhythmia and demands emergency clinical intervention. Hemolysis can be considered the most frequent cause of pseudohyperkalemia (spurious hyperkalemia) or pseudonormokalemia and can be accompanied by a wrong diagnosis and an ensuing inappropriate clinical decision making. A complete review of the potential causes of falsely elevated potassium concentrations in blood is presented in this article. POCT programs properly led and organized by the clinical laboratory can help to prevent errors and their impact on patient care.

scholarly journals Point-of-Care Testing-the Key in the Battle against SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

Micromachines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 1464
Author(s):  
Florina Silvia Iliescu ◽  
Ana Maria Ionescu ◽  
Larisa Gogianu ◽  
Monica Simion ◽  
Violeta Dediu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Rapid Screening ◽  
Diagnostic Tools ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Qrt Pcr ◽  
User Friendly

The deleterious effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic urged the development of diagnostic tools to manage the spread of disease. Currently, the “gold standard” involves the use of quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Even though it is sensitive, specific and applicable for large batches of samples, qRT-PCR is labour-intensive, time-consuming, requires trained personnel and is not available in remote settings. This review summarizes and compares the available strategies for COVID-19: serological testing, Point-of-Care Testing, nanotechnology-based approaches and biosensors. Last but not least, we address the advantages and limitations of these methods as well as perspectives in COVID-19 diagnostics. The effort is constantly focused on understanding the quickly changing landscape of available diagnostic testing of COVID-19 at the clinical levels and introducing reliable and rapid screening point of care testing. The last approach is key to aid the clinical decision-making process for infection control, enhancing an appropriate treatment strategy and prompt isolation of asymptomatic/mild cases. As a viable alternative, Point-of-Care Testing (POCT) is typically low-cost and user-friendly, hence harbouring tremendous potential for rapid COVID-19 diagnosis.

Point of Care Ultrasound in Geriatric Patients: Prospective Evaluation of a Portable Handheld Ultrasound Device

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (03) ◽  
pp. 308-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eckhart Fröhlich ◽  
Katharina Beller ◽  
Reinhold Muller ◽  
Maria Herrmann ◽  
Ines Debove ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Geriatric Patients ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Point Of Care Ultrasound ◽  
Handheld Device ◽  
Ultrasound Device ◽  
Handheld Ultrasound

Abstract Purpose The aim of the current study was to evaluate point of care ultrasound (POCUS) in geriatric patients by echoscopy using a handheld ultrasound device (HHUSD, VScan) at bedside in comparison to a high-end ultrasound system (HEUS) as the gold standard. Materials and Methods Prospective observational study with a total of 112 geriatric patients. The ultrasound examinations were independently performed by two experienced blinded examiners with a portable handheld device and a high-end ultrasound device. The findings were compared with respect to diagnostic findings and therapeutic implications. Results The main indications for the ultrasound examinations were dyspnea (44.6 %), fall (frailty) (24.1 %) and fever (21.4 %). The most frequently found diagnoses were cystic lesions 32.1 % (35/109), hepatic vein congestion 19.3 % (21/109) and ascites 13.6 % (15/110). HHUSD delivered 13 false-negative findings in the abdomen resulting in an “overall sensitivity” of 89.5 %. The respective “overall specificity” was 99.6 % (7 false-positive diagnoses). HHUSD (versus HEUS data) resulted in 13.6 % (17.3 %) diagnostically relevant procedures in the abdomen and 0.9 % (0.9 %) in the thorax. Without HHUSD (HEUS) 95.7 % (100 %) of important pathological findings would have been missed. Conclusion The small HHUSD tool improves clinical decision-making in immobile geriatric patients at the point of care (geriatric ward). In most cases, HHUSD allows sufficiently accurate yes/no diagnoses already at the bedside, thereby clarifying the leading symptoms for early clinical decision-making.

scholarly journals Factors affecting clinical decision-making in inflammatory bowel disease and the role of point-of-care calprotectin

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 1756283X1774473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yannick Derwa ◽  
Christopher J.M. Williams ◽  
Ruchit Sood ◽  
Saqib Mumtaz ◽  
M. Hassan Bholah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Mucosal Inflammation ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

Objectives: Patient-reported symptoms correlate poorly with mucosal inflammation. Clinical decision-making may, therefore, not be based on objective evidence of disease activity. We conducted a study to determine factors associated with clinical decision-making in a secondary care inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) population, using a cross-sectional design. Methods: Decisions to request investigations or escalate medical therapy were recorded from outpatient clinic encounters in a cohort of 276 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn’s disease (CD). Disease activity was assessed using clinical indices, self-reported flare and faecal calprotectin ≥ 250 µg/g. Demographic, disease-related and psychological factors were assessed using validated questionnaires. Logistic regression was performed to determine the association between clinical decision-making and symptoms, mucosal inflammation and psychological comorbidity. Results: Self-reported flare was associated with requesting investigations in CD [odds ratio (OR) 5.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.84–17.0] and UC (OR 10.8; 95% CI 1.8–64.3), but mucosal inflammation was not (OR 1.62; 95% CI 0.49–5.39; and OR 0.21; 95% CI 0.21–1.05, respectively). Self-reported flare (OR 7.96; 95% CI 1.84–34.4), but not mucosal inflammation (OR 1.67; 95% CI 0.46–6.13) in CD, and clinical disease activity (OR 10.36; 95% CI 2.47–43.5) and mucosal inflammation (OR 4.26; 95% CI 1.28–14.2) in UC were associated with escalation of medical therapy. Almost 60% of patients referred for investigation had no evidence of mucosal inflammation. Conclusions: Apart from escalation of medical therapy in UC, clinical decision-making was not associated with mucosal inflammation in IBD. The use of point-of-care calprotectin testing may aid clinical decision-making, improve resource allocation and reduce costs in IBD.

scholarly journals What is the role of technology in improving patient safety? A French, German and UK healthcare professional perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 219-224
Author(s):  
Alain Astier ◽  
Jean Carlet ◽  
Torsten Hoppe-Tichy ◽  
Ann Jacklin ◽  
Annette Jeanes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Cultural Changes ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Patient Pathways ◽  
Professional Perspective ◽  
Enhance Patient Safety

Patient safety in hospitals can be compromised by preventable adverse events (AE). Among the preventable AEs, hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are one of the most burdensome, contributing to not only poorer patient outcomes but institutional burden through direct financial losses and increased patient length of stay.  Technological innovations can enhance patient safety by automating tasks, introducing medication alerts, clinical reminders, improved diagnostic and consultation reports, facilitating information sharing, improving clinical decision-making, intercepting potential errors, reducing variation in practice, and managing workforce shortages as well as making complete patient data available.  A multidisciplinary working group from three European countries was convened to discuss how to optimise the use of technology to reduce preventable AEs in acute care hospitals. The working group identified examples where they felt there were opportunities to streamline patient pathways, including antimicrobial stewardship, point of care testing, microbiology test reporting to streamline time from sample-taking to clinical decision and mobile automated dispensing systems, which can reduce the burden on overworked staff. The working group also discussed key factors that were critical to ensuring different stakeholders, both within and outside the hospital, could meaningfully contribute to improving patient safety. They agreed that technological approaches and advances would have limited impact without meaningful cultural changes at all levels of healthcare infrastructure to implement the benefits offered by current or future technologies.

Point-of-Care Creatinine to Assist Clinical Decision Making in Suspected Sepsis in the Community

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-45
Author(s):  
Susan Simpson ◽  
Joshua Storrar ◽  
James Ritchie ◽  
Khalid Alshawy ◽  
Leonard Ebah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Suspected Sepsis

scholarly journals Accuracy of a Point-of-Care Hemoglobin A1c Assay

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1149-1153 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Nathan ◽  
Amanda Griffin ◽  
Francesca M. Perez ◽  
Erica Basque ◽  
Lily Do ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Laboratory Assessment ◽  
Percentage Points ◽  
Tight Correlation ◽  
Relative Differences ◽  
Laboratory Assay

Point-of-care test (POCT) HbA1c assays provide rapidly available results for clinical decision-making. Accuracy and precision must be established. Venous blood samples from 300 patients were assayed for HbA1c by a laboratory technician (“laboratory assessment”) with the POCT Alere Afinion™ assay and a laboratory (Premier AffinityTM) assay. POCT results from 402 patients’ fingerstick samples assayed by nine nontechnician staff (“clinical assessment”) were compared with the laboratory assay. The laboratory assessment showed tight correlation ( r2= .977, P < .001) between the assays. Mean absolute and relative differences were 0.01 percentage points and 2.1%, respectively. CVs for the POCT and laboratory assays were <2% and <1%, respectively. The clinical assessment also showed a tight correlation between the assays ( r2= .978, P < .001), with mean absolute and relative differences of 0.2 percentage points and 3.41%, respectively. CV for the POCT assay was <2%. The POCT performed acceptably compared to the laboratory assay under realistic clinical conditions.

An evaluation of the performance of the Opioid Manager clinical tool in primary care: A qualitative study

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Robertson, BSc, MD (Candidate) ◽  
Sander L. Hitzig, PhD ◽  
Andrea D. Furlan, MD, PhD
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Electronic Version ◽  
Communication Tool ◽  
Clinical Tool ◽  
Canadian Guideline ◽  
Content Design

Aims: The Opioid Manager (OM) is a point-of-care paper tool for physicians, which summarizes the Canadian Guideline for Safe and Effective Use of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain. To evaluate the efficacy of the OM, there is a need to better understand how physicians are using the OM, and how it is relevant to their practice.Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with six family physicians in Ontario with clinical pain management experience. The interviews were analyzed using content analysis. The technique of “code-recode” was conducted by two analysts to verify content validity.Results: The following main themes emerged: 1) OM as a communication tool; 2) OM as an educational tool; 3) OM as a clinical tool; 4) OM content/design; 5) OM benefits; 6) who the OM is used with; 7) OM potential; and 8) challenges of pain management. Physicians' commented the OM was a useful reference for helping their clinical decision making regarding opioids, and used it to educate and communicate with their patients/colleagues. Although many felt the content/design of the OM had a number of good features, there was a need for modifications (ie, merge with other tools and create electronic version). Given the challenges associated with pain management, a number of benefits were derived from using the OM (ie, protection and building therapeutic alliance), and respondents' felt the tool had the potential to meet a number of unmet needs related to opioid management.Conclusions: Overall, the OM was viewed positively for improving pain management practices but further work is required to refine the tool's potential.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document