scholarly journals 162 Implementation of a mortuary-based fatal injury surveillance(FIS) system in rural and Urban Hospitals in Tanzania (2010–2015)

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. A59.3-A60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Makata ◽  
Ruge Manyere ◽  
Charles Massambu ◽  
Amos Mwakigonja ◽  
Kidist Bartolomeous
2003 ◽  
Vol 24 (10) ◽  
pp. 731-736 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilary M. Babcock ◽  
Victoria Fraser

AbstractObjective:Determine differences in patterns of percutaneous injuries (PIs) in different types of hospitals.Design:Case series of injuries occurring from 1997 to 2001.Setting:Large midwestern healthcare system with a consolidated occupational health database from 9 hospitals, including rural and urban, community and teaching (1 pediatric, 1 adult) facilities, ranging from 113 to 1,400 beds.Participants:Healthcare workers injured between 1997 and 2001.Results:Annual injury rates for all hospitals decreased during the study period from 21 to 16.5/100 beds (chi-square for trend = 22.7; P = .0001). Average annual injury rates were higher at larger hospitals (22.5 vs 9.5 Pis/100 beds; P = .0001). Among small hospitals, rural hospitals had higher rates than did urban hospitals (14.87 vs 8.02 PIs/100 beds; P = .0143). At small hospitals, an increased proportion of injuries occurred in the emergency department (13.7% vs 8.6%; P = .0004), operating room (32.3% vs 25.4%; P = .0002), and ICU (12.3% vs 9.4%; P = .0225), compared with large hospitals. Rural hospitals had higher injury rates in the radiology department (7.7% vs 2%; P = .0015) versus urban hospitals. Injuries at the teaching hospitals occurred more commonly on the wards (28.8% vs 24%; P = .0021) and in ICUs (11.4% vs 7.8%; P = .0006) than at community hospitals. Injuries involving butterfly needles were more common at pediatric versus adult hospitals (15.8% vs 6.5%; P = .0001). The prevalence of source patients infected with HIV and hepatitis C was higher at large hospitals.Conclusions:Significant differences exist in injury rates and patterns among different types of hospitals. These data can be used to target intervention strategies.


2016 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-22
Author(s):  
Yuya K. Kudo ◽  
Linda V. Davis ◽  
Dustin M. Long ◽  
John C. Honaker ◽  
Don K. Nakayama

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura-Mae Baldwin ◽  
Leighton Chan ◽  
C. Holly A. Andrilla ◽  
Edwin D. Huff ◽  
L. Gary Hart

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S301-S301
Author(s):  
Karri A Bauer ◽  
Kalvin Yu ◽  
Vikas Gupta ◽  
Laura A Puzniak

Abstract Background The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has revealed socioeconomic and healthcare inequities in the US. With approximately 20% of the population living in rural areas, there are limitations to healthcare access due to economic constraints, geographical distances, and provider shortages. There is limited data evaluating outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 positive patients treated at rural vs. urban hospitals. The aim of the study was to evaluate characteristics and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients treated at rural vs. urban hospitals in the US. Methods This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort analysis of adult (≥ 18 years) hospitalized patients from 241 US acute care facilities with >1 day inpatient admission with a discharge or death between 3/6/20-5/15/21 (BD Insights Research Database [Becton, Dickinson & Company, Franklin Lakes, NJ]), which includes both small and large hospitals in rural and urban areas. SARS-CoV-2 infection was identified by a positive PCR or antigen during or < 7 days prior to hospital admission. Descriptive statistics were completed. P value of ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Overall, 42 (17.4%) and 199 (82.6%) of hospitals were classified as rural and urban, respectively. A total of 304,073 patients were admitted to a rural hospital with 12,644 (4.2%) SARS-CoV-2 positive. In comparison, a total of 2,844,100 patients were treated at an urban hospital with 132,678 (4.7%) SARS-CoV-2 positive. Patients admitted to rural hospitals were older compared to those treated at an urban hospital (65.2 ± 17.3 vs. 61.5 ± 18.7, P=0.001) (Table 1). Patients treated at an urban facility had significantly higher rates of ICU admission, severe sepsis, and mechanical ventilation. ICU length of stay was significantly longer for patients admitted to an urban hospital compared to a rural hospital (8.1 ± 9.9 vs. 6.1 ±7.2 days, P=0.001) (Table 2). No difference in mortality was observed. Table 1. Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients treated at rural vs. urban hospitals. Table 2. Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 patients treated at rural vs. urban hospitals. *Patients with available data. Conclusion In this large multicenter evaluation of hospitalized patients positive for SARS-CoV-2, there were significant differences in patient characteristics. There was no observed difference in mortality. These findings are important in evaluating the pandemic’s impact on patients in rural and urban healthcare settings. Disclosures Karri A. Bauer, PharmD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Kalvin Yu, MD, BD (Employee) Vikas Gupta, PharmD, BCPS, Becton, Dickinson and Company (Employee, Shareholder) Laura A. Puzniak, PhD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee)


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emefah C Loccoh ◽  
Karen E Joynt Maddox ◽  
Yun Wang ◽  
Dhruv Kazi ◽  
Robert W Yeh ◽  
...  

Introduction: Over the last decade, disparities in cardiovascular mortality have widened between rural and urban areas of the US. Our objective was to determine whether there were differences in treatment patterns and outcomes for acute cardiovascular conditions at rural and urban hospitals. Methods: We used 100% Medicare Claims to identify beneficiaries age 65 years hospitalized 1/1/2016-12/31/2017 for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), and ischemic stroke. We fit a mixed effects model with a logit link function and hospital random intercepts to evaluate condition-specific procedure rates (PCI/CABG, cerebral arteriography, systemic thrombolysis) and 30-day and 1-year mortality rates for beneficiaries admitted to rural vs. urban hospitals, adjusted for age, sex, dual enrollment, and clinical comorbidities. Results: Our study included 398,673 beneficiaries hospitalized for AMI (mean age 77.3 years), 690,218 for heart failure (80.3 years), and 378,170 for stroke (79.4 years). The proportion of AMI, HF, and stroke hospitalizations that occurred at rural hospitals was 10.7%, 14.2%, and 10.6%. Procedures were performed less frequently for beneficiaries admitted to rural compared with urban hospitals (PCI/CABG within 30 days of AMI: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.50, 95% CI 0.47-0.54; cerebral arteriography [aOR 0.15, 0.11-0.22]; and systemic thrombolysis [aOR 0.47, 0.43-0.52] for stroke). Thirty-day mortality was higher at rural vs. urban hospitals for AMI (aOR 1.26, 1.21-1.31), HF (aOR 1.14, 1.11-1.17) and stroke (aOR 1.11, 1.07-1.16), as was 1-year mortality (AMI: aOR 1.31, 1.26-1.35; HF: aOR 1.10, 1.08-1.12; Stroke: aOR 1.14, 1.10-1.17). Conclusion: Older adults admitted to rural hospitals for acute cardiovascular conditions receive lower intensity care and experience higher mortality rates than those admitted to urban hospitals. Policy initiatives that improve cardiovascular care at rural hospitals are urgently needed.


2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. A144-A144
Author(s):  
N. Grills ◽  
J. Ozanne-Smith ◽  
K. Bartolomeos

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document