-
Informatics in Primary Care 2014Increasing investment in eHealth aims to improve cost effectiveness and safety of care. Data extraction and aggregation can create new data products to improve... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Increasing investment in eHealth aims to improve cost effectiveness and safety of care. Data extraction and aggregation can create new data products to improve professional practice and provide feedback to improve the quality of source data. A previous systematic review concluded that locally relevant clinical indicators and use of clinical record systems could support clinical governance. We aimed to extend and update the review with a theoretical framework.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, ABI Inform (Proquest) and Business Source Premier (EBSCO) using the terms curation, information ecosystem, data quality management (DQM), data governance, information governance (IG) and data stewardship. We focused on and analysed the scope of DQM and IG processes, theoretical frameworks, and determinants of the processing, quality assurance, presentation and sharing of data across the enterprise.
FINDINGS
There are good theoretical reasons for integrated governance, but there is variable alignment of DQM, IG and health system objectives across the health enterprise. Ethical constraints exist that require health information ecosystems to process data in ways that are aligned with improving health and system efficiency and ensuring patient safety. Despite an increasingly 'big-data' environment, DQM and IG in health services are still fragmented across the data production cycle. We extend current work on DQM and IG with a theoretical framework for integrated IG across the data cycle.
CONCLUSIONS
The dimensions of this theory-based framework would require testing with qualitative and quantitative studies to examine the applicability and utility, along with an evaluation of its impact on data quality across the health enterprise.
Topics: Cost Control; Databases, Bibliographic; Humans; Medical Informatics; Quality Assurance, Health Care; Research Design; Systems Integration; Telemedicine
PubMed: 25479350
DOI: 10.14236/jhi.v21i4.87 -
Pain Physician Sep 2017Discogenic low back is a distinct clinic entity characterized by pain arising from a damaged disc. The diagnosis is clouded by the controversy surrounding discography.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Discogenic low back is a distinct clinic entity characterized by pain arising from a damaged disc. The diagnosis is clouded by the controversy surrounding discography. The treatment options are limited, with unsatisfactory results from both conservative treatment and surgery. Multiple interventional therapies have been developed to treat discogenic pain, but most have not yet been validated by high quality studies.The best studied treatment for discogenic pain is the use of heat, which has been labeled as thermal intradiscal procedures (TIPs) by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). As the pathology is located in the annulus, we use the term thermal annular procedures (TAPs).
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study is to evaluate and update the efficacy of TAPs to treat chronic refractory discogenic pain.
STUDY DESIGN
The design of this study is a systematic review.
METHODS
The available literature on TAPs in treating chronic refractory discogenic pain was reviewed. The quality of each article used in this analysis was assessed.The level of evidence was classified on a 5-point scale from strong, based upon multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to weak, based upon consensus, as developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) and modified by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP).Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to September 2015 and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles.The primary outcome measures were pain relief and functional improvement of at least 40%. Short-term efficacy was defined as improvement for less than 6 months; long-term efficacy was defined as improvement for 6 months or more.
RESULTS
For this systematic review, 49 studies were identified. Of these, there were 4 RCTs and no observational studies which met the inclusion criteria. Based upon 2 RCTs showing efficacy, with no negative trials, there is Level I, or strong, evidence of the efficacy of biacuplasty in the treatment of chronic, refractory discogenic pain.Based upon one high-quality RCT showing efficacy and one moderate-quality RCT interpreted as showing no benefit, there is Level III, or moderate, evidence supporting the use of intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET) in treating chronic, refractory discogenic pain.The evidence supporting the use of discTRODE is level V, or limited.
CONCLUSION
The evidence is Level I, or strong, that percutaneous biacuplasty is efficacious in the treatment of chronic, refractory discogenic pain. Biacuplasty may be considered as a first-line treatment for chronic, refractory discogenic pain.The evidence is Level III, or moderate, that IDET is efficacious in the treatment of chronic, refractory discogenic pain.The evidence is Level V, or limited, that discTRODE is efficacious in the treatment of chronic, refractory discogenic pain.Key words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, intradiscal disorder, IDET, biacuplasty, discTRODE, thermal intradiscal disorders, thermal annular disorders.
Topics: Annulus Fibrosus; Chronic Pain; Electrocoagulation; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Low Back Pain; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 28934777
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2022Drug insurance schemes are systems that provide access to medicines on a prepaid basis and could potentially improve access to essential medicines and reduce... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Drug insurance schemes are systems that provide access to medicines on a prepaid basis and could potentially improve access to essential medicines and reduce out-of-pocket payments for vulnerable populations.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects on drug use, drug expenditure, healthcare utilisation and healthcare outcomes of alternative policies for regulating drug insurance schemes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases, and two trials registers between November 2014 and September 2020, including a citation search for included studies on 15 September 2021 using Web of Science. We screened reference lists of all the relevant reports that we retrieved and reports from the Background section. Authors of relevant papers, relevant organisations, and discussion lists were contacted to identify additional studies, including unpublished and ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We planned to include randomised trials, non-randomised trials, interrupted time-series studies (including controlled ITS [CITS] and repeated measures [RM] studies), and controlled before-after (CBA) studies. Two review authors independently assessed the search results and reference lists of relevant reports, retrieved the full text of potentially relevant references and independently applied the inclusion criteria to those studies. We resolved disagreements by discussion, and when necessary by including a third review author. We excluded studies of the following pharmaceutical policies covered in other Cochrane Reviews: those that determined how decisions were made about which conditions or drugs were covered; those that placed restrictions on reimbursement for drugs that were covered; and those that regulated out-of-pocket payments for drugs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies and assessed risk of bias for each study, with disagreements being resolved by consensus. We used the criteria suggested by Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) to assess the risk of bias of included studies. For randomised trials, non-randomised trials and controlled before-after studies, we planned to report relative effects. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported the risk ratio (RR) when possible and adjusted for baseline differences in the outcome measures. For interrupted time series and controlled interrupted time-series studies, we computed changes along two dimensions: change in level; and change in slope. We undertook a structured synthesis following the EPOC guidance on this topic, describing the range of effects found in the studies for each category of outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 58 studies that met the inclusion criteria (25 interrupted time-series studies and 33 controlled before-after studies). Most of the studies (54) assessed a single policy implemented in the United States (US) healthcare system: Medicare Part D. The other four assessed other drug insurance schemes from Canada and the US, but only one of them provided analysable data for inclusion in the quantitative synthesis. The introduction of drug insurance schemes may increase prescription drug use (low-certainty evidence). On the other hand, Medicare Part D may decrease drug expenditure measured as both out-of-pocket spending and total drug spending (low-certainty evidence). Regarding healthcare utilisation, drug insurance policies (such as Medicare Part D) may lead to a small increase in visits to the emergency department. However, it is uncertain whether this type of policy increases or decreases hospital admissions or outpatient visits by beneficiaries of the scheme because the certainty of the evidence was very low. Likewise, it is uncertain if the policy increases or reduces health outcomes such as mortality because the certainty of the evidence was very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The introduction of drug insurance schemes such as Medicare Part D in the US health system may increase prescription drug use and may decrease out-of-pocket payments by the beneficiaries of the scheme and total drug expenditures. It may also lead to a small increase in visits to the emergency department by the beneficiaries of the policy. Its effects on other healthcare utilisation outcomes and on health outcomes are uncertain because of the very low certainty of the evidence. The applicability of this evidence to settings outside US healthcare is limited.
Topics: Aged; Drug and Narcotic Control; Health Expenditures; Humans; Insurance, Pharmaceutical Services; National Health Programs; Prescription Drugs
PubMed: 35502614
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011703.pub2 -
Blood May 2020There may be many predictors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients, but until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
There may be many predictors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients, but until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the certainty of the evidence have not been published. We conducted a systematic review to identify prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients and searched Medline and EMBASE from inception through May 2018. We considered studies that identified potential prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized adult medical patients. Reviewers extracted data in duplicate and independently and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Of 69 410 citations, we included 17 studies in our analysis: 14 that reported on VTE, and 3 that reported on bleeding. For VTE, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age; elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, and fibrinogen levels; tachycardia; thrombocytosis; leukocytosis; fever; leg edema; lower Barthel Index (BI) score; immobility; paresis; previous history of VTE; thrombophilia; malignancy; critical illness; and infections. For bleeding, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age, sex, anemia, obesity, low hemoglobin, gastroduodenal ulcers, rehospitalization, critical illness, thrombocytopenia, blood dyscrasias, hepatic disease, renal failure, antithrombotic medication, and presence of a central venous catheter. Elevated CRP, a lower BI, a history of malignancy, and elevated heart rate are not included in most VTE risk assessment models. This study informs risk prediction in the management of hospitalized medical patients for VTE and bleeding; it also informs guidelines for VTE prevention and future research.
Topics: Adult; Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Comorbidity; Female; Hemorrhage; Hospitalization; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prognosis; Risk Factors; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 32092132
DOI: 10.1182/blood.2019003603 -
European Journal of Vascular and... Jul 2017A systems approach to patient safety proposes that a wide range of factors contribute to surgical outcome, yet the impact of team, work environment, and organisational... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
A systems approach to patient safety proposes that a wide range of factors contribute to surgical outcome, yet the impact of team, work environment, and organisational factors, is not fully understood in arterial surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize and discuss what is already known about the impact of system factors on quality and safety in arterial surgery.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review of original research papers in English using MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases, was performed according to PRISMA guidelines.
REVIEW METHODS
Independent reviewers selected papers according to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, and using predefined data fields, extracted relevant data on team, work environment, and organisational factors, and measures of quality and/or safety, in arterial procedures.
RESULTS
Twelve papers met the selection criteria. Study endpoints were not consistent between papers, and most failed to report their clinical significance. A variety of tools were used to measure team skills in five papers; only one paper measured the relationship between team factors and patient outcomes. Two papers reported that equipment failures were common and had a significant impact on operating room efficiency. The influence of hospital characteristics on failure-to-rescue rates was tested in one large study, although their conclusions were limited to the American Medicare population. Five papers implemented changes in the patient pathway, but most studies failed to account for potential confounding variables.
CONCLUSIONS
A small number of heterogenous studies have evaluated the relationship between system factors and quality or safety in arterial surgery. There is some evidence of an association between system factors and patient outcomes, but there is more work to be done to fully understand this relationship. Future research would benefit from consistency in definitions, the use of validated assessment tools, measurement of clinically relevant endpoints, and adherence to national reporting guidelines.
Topics: Arteries; Attitude of Health Personnel; Cooperative Behavior; Humans; Interdisciplinary Communication; Organizational Culture; Patient Care Team; Patient Safety; Process Assessment, Health Care; Quality Indicators, Health Care; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Surgical Procedures; Workplace
PubMed: 28506562
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.03.014 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research Feb 2021Use of patient portals has been associated with positive outcomes in patient engagement and satisfaction. Portal studies have also connected portal use, as well as the...
BACKGROUND
Use of patient portals has been associated with positive outcomes in patient engagement and satisfaction. Portal studies have also connected portal use, as well as the nature of users' interactions with portals, and the contents of their generated data to meaningful cost and quality outcomes. Incentive programs in the United States have encouraged uptake of health information technology, including patient portals, by setting standards for meaningful use of such technology. However, despite widespread interest in patient portal use and adoption, studies on patient portals differ in actual metrics used to operationalize and track utilization, leading to unsystematic and incommensurable characterizations of use. No known review has systematically assessed the measurements used to investigate patient portal utilization.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to apply systematic review criteria to identify and compare methods for quantifying and reporting patient portal use.
METHODS
Original studies with quantifiable metrics of portal use published in English between 2014 and the search date of October 17, 2018, were obtained from PubMed using the Medical Subject Heading term "Patient Portals" and related keyword searches. The first search round included full text review of all results to confirm a priori data charting elements of interest and suggest additional categories inductively; this round was supplemented by the retrieval of works cited in systematic reviews (based on title screening of all citations). An additional search round included broader keywords identified during the full-text review of the first round. Second round results were screened at abstract level for inclusion and confirmed by at least two raters. Included studies were analyzed for metrics related to basic use/adoption, frequency of use, duration metrics, intensity of use, and stratification of users into "super user" or high utilizers. Additional categories related to provider (including care team/administrative) use of the portal were identified inductively. Additional analyses included metrics aligned with meaningful use stage 2 (MU-2) categories employed by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the association between the number of portal metrics examined and the number of citations and the journal impact factor.
RESULTS
Of 315 distinct search results, 87 met the inclusion criteria. Of the a priori metrics, plus provider use, most studies included either three (26 studies, 30%) or four (23 studies, 26%) metrics. Nine studies (10%) only reported the patient use/adoption metric and only one study (1%) reported all six metrics. Of the US-based studies (n=76), 18 (24%) were explicitly motivated by MU-2 compliance; 40 studies (53%) at least mentioned these incentives, but only 6 studies (8%) presented metrics from which compliance rates could be inferred. Finally, the number of metrics examined was not associated with either the number of citations or the publishing journal's impact factor.
CONCLUSIONS
Portal utilization measures in the research literature can fall below established standards for "meaningful" or they can substantively exceed those standards in the type and number of utilization properties measured. Understanding how patient portal use has been defined and operationalized may encourage more consistent, well-defined, and perhaps more meaningful standards for utilization, informing future portal development.
Topics: Humans; Patient Participation; Patient Portals; Utilization Review
PubMed: 33629962
DOI: 10.2196/23493 -
PloS One 2015Hospital readmission rates are being used to evaluate performance. A survey of the present rates is needed before policies can be developed to decrease incidence of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Hospital readmission rates are being used to evaluate performance. A survey of the present rates is needed before policies can be developed to decrease incidence of readmission. We address three questions: What is the present rate of 30-day readmission in orthopedics? How do factors such as orthopedic specialty, data source, patient insurance, and time of data collection affect the 30-day readmission rate? What are the causes and risk factors for 30-day readmissions?
METHODS/FINDINGS
A review was first registered with Prospero (CRD42014010293, 6/17/2014) and a meta-analysis was performed to assess the current 30-day readmission rate in orthopedics. Studies published after 2006 were retrieved, and 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. The 30-day readmission rate was extrapolated from each study along with the orthopedic subspecialty, data source, patient insurance, time of collection, patient demographics, and cause of readmission. A sensitivity analysis was completed on the stratified groups. The overall 30-day readmission rate across all orthopedics was 5.4 percent (95% confidence interval: 4.8,6.0). There was no significant difference between subspecialties. Studies that retrieved data from a multicenter registry had a lower 30-day readmission rate than those reporting data from a single hospital or a large national database. Patient populations that only included Medicare patients had a higher 30-day readmission rate than populations of all insurance. The 30-day readmission rate has decreased in the past ten years. Age, length of stay, discharge to skilled nursing facility, increased BMI, ASA score greater than 3, and Medicare/Medicaid insurance showed statistically positive correlation with increased 30-day readmissions in greater than 75 percent of studies. Surgical site complications accounted for 46 percent of 30-day readmissions.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis shows the present rate of 30-day readmissions in orthopedics. Demonstrable heterogeneity between studies underlines the importance of uniform collection and reporting of readmission rates for hospital evaluation and reimbursement.
Topics: Humans; Orthopedics; Patient Readmission; Risk Factors
PubMed: 25884444
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123593 -
International Journal of Medical... Apr 2023Poorly designed electronic medication management systems (EMMS) or computerized physician order entry (CPOE) systems in hospital settings can result in usability issues... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Poorly designed electronic medication management systems (EMMS) or computerized physician order entry (CPOE) systems in hospital settings can result in usability issues and in turn, patient safety risks. As a safety science, human factors and safety analysis methods have potential to support the safe and usable design of EMMS.
OBJECTIVE
To identify and describe human factors and safety analysis methods that have been used in the design or redesign of EMMS used in hospital settings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review, following PRISMA guidelines, was conducted by searching online databases and relevant journals from January 2011 to May 2022. Studies were included if they described the practical application of human factors and safety analysis methods to support the design or redesign of a clinician-facing EMMS, or its components. Methods used were extracted and mapped to human centered design (HCD) activities: understanding context of use; specifying user requirements; producing design solutions; and evaluating the design.
RESULTS
Twenty-one papers met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 21 human factors and safety analysis methods were used in the design or redesign of EMMS with prototyping, usability testing, participant surveys/questionnaires and interviews the most frequent. Human factors and safety analysis methods were most frequently used to evaluate the design of a system (n = 67; 56.3%). Nineteen of 21 (90%) methods used aimed to identify usability issues and/or support iterative design; only one paper utilized a safety-oriented method and one, a mental workload assessment method.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
While the review identified 21 methods, EMMS design primarily utilized a subset of available methods, and rarely a method focused on safety. Given the high-risk nature of medication management in complex hospital environments, and the potential for harm due to poorly designed EMMS, there is significant potential to apply more safety-oriented human factors and safety analysis methods to support EMMS design.
Topics: Humans; Medication Therapy Management; Medical Order Entry Systems; Medication Systems, Hospital; Patient Safety
PubMed: 36809716
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105017 -
BMJ Open Mar 2023The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of artificial intelligence (AI) and/or algorithms on drug management in primary care settings comparing AI and/or...
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of artificial intelligence (AI) and/or algorithms on drug management in primary care settings comparing AI and/or algorithms with standard clinical practice. Second, we evaluated what is the most frequently reported type of medication error and the most used AI machine type.
METHODS
A systematic review of literature was conducted querying PubMed, Cochrane and ISI Web of Science until November 2021. The search strategy and the study selection were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome framework. Specifically, the Population chosen was general population of all ages (ie, including paediatric patients) in primary care settings (ie, home setting, ambulatory and nursery homes); the Intervention considered was the analysis AI and/or algorithms (ie, intelligent programs or software) application in primary care for reducing medications errors, the Comparator was the general practice and, lastly, the Outcome was the reduction of preventable medication errors (eg, overprescribing, inappropriate medication, drug interaction, risk of injury, dosing errors or in an increase in adherence to therapy). The methodological quality of included studies was appraised adopting the Quality Assessment of Controlled Intervention Studies of the National Institute of Health for randomised controlled trials.
RESULTS
Studies reported in different ways the effective reduction of medication error. Ten out of 14 included studies, corresponding to 71% of articles, reported a reduction of medication errors, supporting the hypothesis that AI is an important tool for patient safety.
CONCLUSION
This study highlights how a proper application of AI in primary care is possible, since it provides an important tool to support the physician with drug management in non-hospital environments.
Topics: Humans; Child; Artificial Intelligence; Medication Therapy Management; Medication Errors; Patient Safety; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 36958780
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065301 -
Cureus May 2023Both cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) have been shown to be effective methods for removing small colorectal polyps, but the optimal method... (Review)
Review
A Comparative Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Hot Snare Polypectomy and Cold Snare Polypectomy for Removing Small Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Both cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) have been shown to be effective methods for removing small colorectal polyps, but the optimal method for achieving complete resection remains unclear. To address this issue, we conducted a systematic search of relevant articles using databases such as PubMed, ProQuest, and EBSCOhost. The search criteria included randomized controlled trials that compared CSP and HSP for small colorectal polyps ≤10 mm and the articles were screened based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data were analyzed using RevMan software (version 5.4; Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom), and meta-analysis was performed with outcomes measured using pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The Mantel-Haenszel random effect model was used to calculate the OR. We selected a total of 14 randomized controlled trials involving 11601 polyps for analysis. Pooled analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the incomplete resection rate between CSP and HSP (OR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.88-1.73, p-value: 0.27; I: 51%), en bloc resection rate (OR: 0.66; 95%CI: 0.38-1.13; p: 0.13; I: 60%), and polyp retrieval rate (OR: 0.97; 95%CI: 0.59-1.57; p: 0.89; I: 17%). For safety endpoints, there is no statistically significant difference in intraprocedural bleeding rate between CSP and HSP per patient analysis (OR: 2.37, 95% CI: 0.74-7.54; p: 0.95; I: 74%) and per polyp basis (OR: 1.84, 95% CI: 0.72-4.72; p: 0.20; I: 85%). CSP had lower OR for the delayed bleeding outcome when compared with the HSP group per patient basis (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.2-0.86; p: 0.02; I: 25%), but not in the per polyp analysis (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.12-3; p: 0.53; I: 0%). Total polypectomy time was significantly shorter in the CSP group (mean difference: -0.81 minutes; 95% CI: -0.96, -0.66; p:<0.00001; I: 0%). Thus, CSP is both an efficacious and safe method for removing small colorectal polyps. Therefore, it can be recommended as a suitable alternative to HSP for the removal of small colorectal polyps. However, more studies are necessary to evaluate any long-term differences between the two methods such as polyp recurrence rates.
PubMed: 37292560
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.38713