scholarly journals Socioeconomic Determinants of Tertiary Rhinology Care Utilization

OTO Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 2473974X2110098
Author(s):  
David M. Poetker ◽  
David R. Friedland ◽  
Jazzmyne A. Adams ◽  
Ling Tong ◽  
Kristen Osinski ◽  
...  

Objective The objective of this study was to determine the impact of patient demographics and socioeconomic factors on the utilization of tertiary rhinology care services in an upper Midwestern academic medical center. Study Design Retrospective review of electronic health records. Setting Academic medical center. Methods The electronic health record of our academic center was interrogated for the demographics and diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) among adult patients seen by fellowship-trained rhinologists from 2000 to 2019. Patient characteristics (age, sex, race, insurance status) and population-level data (median income and education level) were compared with utilization of tertiary rhinology services for CRS. Utilization rates were calculated for each regional zip code and correlated with census data for median income and education. The association between determinants of health and tertiary rhinology utilization was assessed by multivariate regression analyses. Results A total of 8325 patients diagnosed with CRS used tertiary rhinology services. Patients were older (median, 58.9 years) and more likely to be female (57.6%), White (85%), and privately insured (60%) when compared with patients seen across our hospital system ( P < .001). Adjusted analyses showed median income, education level, and White race to be independently correlated with tertiary care utilization. Private insurance alone was not an independent contributing factor to access. Conclusion Utilization of tertiary rhinology services correlated with income, race, and education level. Private insurance was not an independent factor. These results highlight social differences in determinants of access to tertiary otolaryngologic care.

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s168-s169
Author(s):  
Rebecca Choudhury ◽  
Ronald Beaulieu ◽  
Thomas Talbot ◽  
George Nelson

Background: As more US hospitals report antibiotic utilization to the CDC, standardized antimicrobial administration ratios (SAARs) derived from patient care unit-based antibiotic utilization data will increasingly be used to guide local antibiotic stewardship interventions. Location-based antibiotic utilization surveillance data are often utilized given the relative ease of ascertainment. However, aggregating antibiotic use data on a unit basis may have variable effects depending on the number of clinical teams providing care. In this study, we examined antibiotic utilization from units at a tertiary-care hospital to illustrate the potential challenges of using unit-based antibiotic utilization to change individual prescribing. Methods: We used inpatient pharmacy antibiotic use administration records at an adult tertiary-care academic medical center over a 6-month period from January 2019 through June 2019 to describe the geographic footprints and AU of medical, surgical, and critical care teams. All teams accounting for at least 1 patient day present on each unit during the study period were included in the analysis, as were all teams prescribing at least 1 antibiotic day of therapy (DOT). Results: The study population consisted of 24 units: 6 ICUs (25%) and 18 non-ICUs (75%). Over the study period, the average numbers of teams caring for patients in ICU and non-ICU wards were 10.2 (range, 3.2–16.9) and 13.7 (range, 10.4–18.9), respectively. Units were divided into 3 categories by the number of teams, accounting for ≥70% of total patient days present (Fig. 1): “homogenous” (≤3), “pauciteam” (4–7 teams), and “heterogeneous” (>7 teams). In total, 12 (50%) units were “pauciteam”; 7 (29%) were “homogeneous”; and 5 (21%) were “heterogeneous.” Units could also be classified as “homogenous,” “pauciteam,” or “heterogeneous” based on team-level antibiotic utilization or DOT for specific antibiotics. Different patterns emerged based on antibiotic restriction status. Classifying units based on vancomycin DOT (unrestricted) exhibited fewer “heterogeneous” units, whereas using meropenem DOT (restricted) revealed no “heterogeneous” units. Furthermore, the average number of units where individual clinical teams prescribed an antibiotic varied widely (range, 1.4–12.3 units per team). Conclusions: Unit-based antibiotic utilization data may encounter limitations in affecting prescriber behavior, particularly on units where a large number of clinical teams contribute to antibiotic utilization. Additionally, some services prescribing antibiotics across many hospital units may be minimally influenced by unit-level data. Team-based antibiotic utilization may allow for a more targeted metric to drive individual team prescribing.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s114-s115
Author(s):  
Alexandra Johnson ◽  
Bobby Warren ◽  
Deverick John Anderson ◽  
Melissa Johnson ◽  
Isabella Gamez ◽  
...  

Background: Stethoscopes are a known vector for microbial transmission; however, common strategies used to clean stethoscopes pose certain barriers that prevent routine cleaning after every use. We aimed to determine whether using readily available alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) would effectively reduce bacterial bioburden on stethoscopes in a real-world setting. Methods: We performed a randomized study on inpatient wards of an academic medical center to assess the impact of using ABHR (AlcareExtra; ethyl alcohol, 80%) on the bacterial bioburden of stethoscopes. Stethoscopes were obtained from healthcare providers after routine use during an inpatient examination and were randomized to control (no intervention) or ABHR disinfection (2 pumps applied to tubing and bell or diaphragm by study personnel, then allowed to dry). Cultures of the tubing and bell or diaphragm were obtained with premoistened cellulose sponges. Sponges were combined with 1% Tween20-PBS and mixed in the Seward Stomacher. The homogenate was centrifuged and all but ~5 mL of the supernatant was discarded. Samples were plated on sheep’s blood agar and selective media for clinically important pathogens (CIPs) including S. aureus, Enterococcus spp, and gram-negative bacteria (GNB). CFU count was determined by counting the number of colonies on each plate and using dilution calculations to calculate the CFU of the original ~5 mL homogenate. Results: In total, 80 stethoscopes (40 disinfection, 40 control) were sampled from 46 physicians (MDs) and MD students (57.5%), 13 advanced practice providers (16.3%), and 21 nurses (RNs) and RN students (26.3%). The median CFU count was ~30-fold lower in the disinfection arm compared to control (106 [IQR, 50–381] vs 3,320 [986–4,834]; P < .0001). The effect was consistent across provider type, frequency of recent usual stethoscope cleaning, age, and status of pet ownership (Fig. 1). Overall, 26 of 80 (33%) of stethoscopes harbored CIP. The presence of CIP was lower but not significantly different for stethoscopes that underwent disinfection versus controls: S. aureus (25% vs 32.5%), Enterococcus (2.5% vs 10%), and GNB (2.5% vs 5%). Conclusions: Stethoscopes may serve as vectors for clean hands to become recontaminated immediately prior to performing patient care activities. Using ABHR to clean stethoscopes after every use is a practical and effective strategy to reduce overall bacterial contamination that can be easily incorporated into clinical workflow. Larger studies are needed to determine the efficacy of ABHR at removing CIP from stethoscopes as stethoscopes in both arms were frequently contaminated with CIP. Prior cleaning of stethoscopes on the study day did not seem to impact contamination rates, suggesting the impact of alcohol foam disinfection is short-lived and may need to be repeated frequently (ie, after each use).Funding: NoneDisclosures: NoneDisclosures: NoneFunding: None


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s84-s84
Author(s):  
Lorinda Sheeler ◽  
Mary Kukla ◽  
Oluchi Abosi ◽  
Holly Meacham ◽  
Stephanie Holley ◽  
...  

Background: In December of 2019, the World Health Organization reported a novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 [SARS-CoV-2)]) causing severe respiratory illness originating in Wuhan, China. Since then, an increasing number of cases and the confirmation of human-to-human transmission has led to the need to develop a communication campaign at our institution. We describe the impact of the communication campaign on the number of calls received and describe patterns of calls during the early stages of our response to this emerging infection. Methods: The University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics is an 811-bed academic medical center with >200 outpatient clinics. In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, we launched a communications campaign on January 17, 2020. Initial communications included email updates to staff and a dedicated COVID-19 webpage with up-to-date information. Subsequently, we developed an electronic screening tool to guide a risk assessment during patient check in. The screening tool identifies travel to China in the past 14 days and the presence of symptoms defined as fever >37.7°C plus cough or difficulty breathing. The screening tool was activated on January 24, 2020. In addition, university staff contacted each student whose primary residence record included Hubei Province, China. Students were provided with medical contact information, signs and symptoms to monitor for, and a thermometer. Results: During the first 5 days of the campaign, 3 calls were related to COVID-19. The number of calls increased to 18 in the 5 days following the implementation of the electronic screening tool. Of the 21 calls received to date, 8 calls (38%) were generated due to the electronic travel screen, 4 calls (19%) were due to a positive coronavirus result in a multiplex respiratory panel, 4 calls (19%) were related to provider assessment only (without an electronic screening trigger), and 2 calls (10%) sought additional information following the viewing of the web-based communication campaign. Moreover, 3 calls (14%) were for people without travel history but with respiratory symptoms and contact with a person with recent travel to China. Among those reporting symptoms after travel to China, mean time since arrival to the United States was 2.7 days (range, 0–11 days). Conclusion: The COVID-19 outbreak is evolving, and providing up to date information is challenging. Implementing an electronic screening tool helped providers assess patients and direct questions to infection prevention professionals. Analyzing the types of calls received helped tailor messaging to frontline staff.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None


2000 ◽  
Vol 231 (6) ◽  
pp. 860-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas S. Huber ◽  
Lori M. Carlton ◽  
Donna G. O’Hern ◽  
Nancy S. Hardt ◽  
C. Keith Ozaki ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S311-S311
Author(s):  
Laura Selby ◽  
Richard Starlin

Abstract Background Healthcare workers have experienced a significant burden of COVID-19 disease. COVID mRNA vaccines have shown great efficacy in prevention of severe disease and hospitalization due to COVID infection, but limited data is available about acquisition of infection and asymptomatic viral shedding. Methods Fully vaccinated healthcare workers at a tertiary-care academic medical center in Omaha Nebraska who reported a household exposure to COVID-19 infection are eligible for a screening program in which they are serially screened with PCR but allowed to work if negative on initial test and asymptomatic. Serial screening by NP swab was completed every 5-7 days, and workers became excluded from work if testing was positive or became symptomatic. Results Of the 94 employees who were fully vaccinated at the time of the household exposure to COVID-19 infection, 78 completed serial testing and were negative. Sixteen were positive on initial or subsequent screening. Vaccine failure rate of 17.0% (16/94). Healthcare workers exposed to household COVID positive contact Conclusion High risk household exposures to COVID-19 infection remains a significant potential source of infections in healthcare workers even after workers are fully vaccinated with COVID mRNA vaccines especially those with contact to positive domestic partners. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S188-S189
Author(s):  
Deepika Sivakumar ◽  
Shelbye R Herbin ◽  
Raymond Yost ◽  
Marco R Scipione

Abstract Background Inpatient antibiotic use early on in the COVID-19 pandemic may have increased due to the inability to distinguish between bacterial and COVID-19 pneumonia. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of COVID-19 on antimicrobial usage during three separate waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of patients admitted to Detroit Medical Center between 3/10/19 to 4/24/21. Median days of therapy per 1000 adjusted patient days (DOT/1000 pt days) was evaluated for all administered antibiotics included in our pneumonia guidelines during 4 separate time periods: pre-COVID (3/3/19-4/27/19); 1st wave (3/8/20-5/2/20); 2nd wave (12/6/21-1/30/21); and 3rd wave (3/7/21-4/24/21). Antibiotics included in our pneumonia guidelines include: amoxicillin, azithromycin, aztreonam, ceftriaxone, cefepime, ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, linezolid, meropenem, moxifloxacin, piperacillin-tazobactam, tobramycin, and vancomycin. The percent change in antibiotic use between the separate time periods was also evaluated. Results An increase in antibiotics was seen during the 1st wave compared to the pre-COVID period (2639 [IQR 2339-3439] DOT/1000 pt days vs. 2432 [IQR 2291-2499] DOT/1000 pt days, p=0.08). This corresponded to an increase of 8.5% during the 1st wave. This increase did not persist during the 2nd and 3rd waves of the pandemic, and the use decreased by 8% and 16%, respectively, compared to the pre-COVID period. There was an increased use of ceftriaxone (+6.5%, p=0.23), doxycycline (+46%, p=0.13), linezolid (+61%, p=0.014), cefepime (+50%, p=0.001), and meropenem (+29%, p=0.25) during the 1st wave compared to the pre-COVID period. Linezolid (+39%, p=0.013), cefepime (+47%, p=0.08) and tobramycin (+47%, p=0.05) use remained high during the 3rd wave compared to the pre-COVID period, but the use was lower when compared to the 1st and 2nd waves. Figure 1. Antibiotic Use 01/2019 to 04/2019 Conclusion Antibiotics used to treat bacterial pneumonia during the 1st wave of the pandemic increased and there was a shift to broader spectrum agents during that period. The increased use was not sustained during the 2nd and 3rd waves of the pandemic, possibly due to the increased awareness of the differences between patients who present with COVID-19 pneumonia and bacterial pneumonia. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Merilyn S Varghese ◽  
Jordan B Strom ◽  
Sarah Fostello ◽  
Warren J Manning

Introduction: COVID-19 has significantly impacted hospital systems worldwide. The impact of statewide stay-at-home mandates on echocardiography volumes is unclear. Methods: We queried our institutional echocardiography database from 6/1/2018 to 6/13/2020 to examine rates of transthoracic (TTE), stress (SE), and transesophageal echocardiograms (TEE) prior to and following the COVID-19 Massachusetts stay-at-home order on March 15, 2020. Results: Among 36,377 total studies performed during the study period, mean weekly study volume dropped from 332 + 3 TTEs/week, 30 + 1 SEs/week, and 21 + 1 TEEs/week prior to the stay-at-home order (6/1/2018-3/15/2020) to 158 + 13 TTEs/week, 8 + 2 SEs/week, and 8 + 1 TEEs/week after (% change, -52%, -73%, and -62% respectively, all p < 0.001 when comparing volume prior to March 15 versus after). Weekly TTEs correlated strongly with hospital admissions throughout the study period (r = 0.93, 95% CI 0.89-0.95, p < 0.001) ( Figure ). Outpatient TTEs declined more than inpatient TTEs (% change, -74% vs. -39%, p <0.001). As of 3 weeks following the cessation of the stay-at-home order, TTE, SE, and TEE weekly volumes have increased to 73%, 66%, and 81% of pre-pandemic levels, respectively. Conclusions: Echocardiography volumes fell precipitously following the Massachusetts stay-at-home order, strongly paralleling declines in overall hospitalizations. Outpatient TTEs declined more than inpatient TTEs. Despite lifting of the order, echocardiography volumes remain substantially below pre-pandemic levels. The impact of the decreased use of echocardiographic services on patient outcomes remains to be determined.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satish Munigala ◽  
Rebecca Rojek ◽  
Helen Wood ◽  
Melanie L. Yarbrough ◽  
Ronald R. Jackups ◽  
...  

AbstractObjective:To evaluate the impact of changes to urine testing orderables in computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system on urine culturing practices.Design:Retrospective before-and-after study.Setting:A 1,250-bed academic tertiary-care referral center.Patients:Hospitalized adults who had ≥1 urine culture performed during their stay.Intervention:The intervention (implemented in April 2017) consisted of notifications to providers, changes to order sets, and inclusion of the new urine culture reflex tests in commonly used order sets. We compared the urine culture rates before the intervention (January 2015 to April 2016) and after the intervention (May 2016 to August 2017), adjusting for temporal trends.Results:During the study period, 18,954 inpatients (median age, 62 years; 68.8% white and 52.3% female) had 24,569 urine cultures ordered. Overall, 6,662 urine cultures (27%) were positive. The urine culturing rate decreased significantly in the postintervention period for any specimen type (38.1 per 1,000 patient days preintervention vs 20.9 per 1,000 patient days postintervention; P < .001), clean catch (30.0 vs 18.7; P < .001) and catheterized urine (7.8 vs 1.9; P < .001). Using an interrupted time series model, urine culture rates decreased for all specimen types (P < .05).Conclusions:Our intervention of changes to order sets and inclusion of the new urine culture reflex tests resulted in a 45% reduction in the urine cultures ordered. CPOE system format plays a vital role in reducing the burden of unnecessary urine cultures and should be implemented in combination with other efforts.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 583-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Gorgone ◽  
Brian McNichols ◽  
Valerie J. Lang ◽  
William Novak ◽  
Alec B. O'Connor

ABSTRACT Background  Training residents to become competent in common bedside procedures can be challenging. Some hospitals have attending physician–led procedure teams with oversight of all procedures to improve procedural training, but these teams require significant resources to establish and maintain. Objective  We sought to improve resident procedural training by implementing a resident-run procedure team without routine attending involvement. Methods  We created the role of a resident procedure coordinator (RPC). Interested residents on less time-intensive rotations voluntarily served as RPC. Medical providers in the hospital contacted the RPC through a designated pager when a bedside procedure was needed. A structured credentialing process, using direct observation and a procedure-specific checklist, was developed to determine residents' competence for completing procedures independently. Checklists were developed by the residency program and approved by institutional subspecialists. The service was implemented in June 2016 at an 850-bed academic medical center with 70 internal medicine and 32 medicine-pediatrics residents. The procedure service functioned without routine attending involvement. The impact was evaluated through resident procedure logs and surveys of residents and attending physicians. Results  Compared with preimplementation procedure logs, there were substantial increases postimplementation in resident-performed procedures and the number of residents credentialed in paracenteses, thoracenteses, and lumbar punctures. Fifty-nine of 102 (58%) residents responded to the survey, with 42 (71%) reporting the initiative increased their ability to obtain procedural experience. Thirty-one of 36 (86%) attending respondents reported preferentially using the service. Conclusions  The RPC model increased resident procedural training opportunities using a structured sign-off process and an operationalized service.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document