Ambulatory care casemix measures.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to D R Berlowitz.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the usefulness of a routine, comprehensive battery of laboratory tests in a severely impaired elderly nursing home population. DESIGN: Prospective observational survey. SETTING: Skilled nursing facility wards of a geriatric and extended care veterans hospital. PATIENTS: Consecutive sample of 108 veterans with severe cognitive and functional impairments, who had been hospitalized at least 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportions of tests categorized as screening, monitoring, follow-up, or diagnostic; frequency of abnormal test results, interventions warranted and performed on the basis of these abnormalities, and beneficial or adverse effects. RESULTS: Of 6771 individual nondiagnostic tests performed, 17.2% yielded abnormal results; of these, 33.3% were new. However, only 0.2% of tests resulted in patient benefit. Of 989 panels performed, 31.0% contained at least one abnormality, but only 1.0% of panels (10 patients) yielded any benefit. Overall usefulness was related to the purpose of the testing, with 31.5% of screening tests yielding abnormalities, compared with 45.5%, 78.2%, and 68.7% of monitoring, follow-up, and diagnostic panels, respectively (P < .05 for each compared with screening panels). None of the screening panels detected an abnormality that led to patient benefit, compared with 1.0%, 1.4%, and 3.0% of monitoring, follow-up, and diagnostic panels. CONCLUSIONS: Routine comprehensive laboratory panels may not be warranted in the most severely impaired elderly patients in long-term care settings. Discontinuing true screening tests and limiting testing strictly to monitoring, follow-up, or diagnostic purposes could minimize the costs of laboratory assessment without losing its potential benefits.
Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders have become an accepted part of medical practice. While these orders have been extensively evaluated in acute care hospitals, little is known about their use in the long-term care setting. We reviewed the medical records of all admissions to a chronic care hospital over a 13-month period, collecting data on selected patient characteristics, use of DNR orders, and patient outcomes during the 6-week period following admission. Fifty-eight of the 301 patients (19.3%) had a DNR order written. Patients' families were involved predominantly in the DNR decision in 73% of the cases while patients themselves were involved in only 18%. Physicians made the decision unilaterally in 6% of the cases. Patients' functional status rather than specific diagnoses predicted the use of DNR orders. Patients with DNR orders were twice as likely to receive new intravenous therapies than patients without those orders (71% vs 33%, P less than 0.01) and four times as likely to die (38% vs 9%, P less than 0.01). They were no more likely to be transferred emergently to an acute care hospital (5% vs 9%, P greater than 0.2). We conclude that DNR orders are not infrequently used, and physicians rarely make the decision unilaterally. Patients with DNR orders have a high likelihood of dying and are infrequently transferred to acute care facilities.
Patients with pressure sores have been observed to have a poor prognosis. The short-term outcome of pressure sores at a long-term care hospital was therefore evaluated. Medical records on the 301 admissions to this hospital over a 13-month period were reviewed. One hundred patients (33%) had a pressure sore present on admission. Using ordinary therapies, 79% of these pressure sores improved and 40% completely healed during the 6-week follow-up period. Remaining bed- or chair-bound was the sole patient characteristic associated with a failure of the pressure sore to improve. Mortality rates were significantly increased in patients with a pressure sore present on admission (relative risk [RR] = 1.9), in patients who developed a new sore (RR = 3.1), and in patients in whom the pressure sore failed to improve (RR = 3.3). However, the pressure sores did not appear to be the direct cause of this increased mortality. These data suggest that the majority of pressure sores encountered at a long-term care hospital can be successfully managed in this setting. Although patients with pressure sores have an increased mortality rate, this is most likely due to coexisting medical conditions.
The purpose of this study was to identify prospectively risk factors for pressure sores and to compare these results with a cross-sectional analysis in the same population. Medical records on all admissions to a chronic care hospital over a 13-month period were reviewed. Data on potential risk factors were abstracted from the initial history, physical examination, nursing assessment, and laboratory studies. Pressure sore status on admission and at three weeks was determined from a standardized from completed on all patients with a score. The cross-sectional analysis was performed by comparing patients with and without a pressure sore at the time of admission. The cohort analysis used patients initially without a pressure sore and monitored for a new sore at three weeks. Factors associated with pressure sores on univariate testing were entered into a stepwise logistic regression model. One hundred of the 301 admissions presented with a pressure sore. Factors significantly associated with the presence of a sore were altered level of consciousness (OR = 4.1), bed- or chair-bound (OR = 2.4), impaired nutritional intake (OR = 1.9), and hypoalbuminemia (OR = 1.8 for 10 mg/mL decrease). Of the 185 patients without a pressure sore, 20 (10.8%) developed a sore. Factors significantly associated with the development of a new pressure sore were a history of cerebrovascular accident (OR = 5.0), bed- or chair-bound (OR = 3.8), and impaired nutritional intake (OR = 2.8). Neither urinary nor fecal incontinence, nor the presence of hypoalbuminemia, was associated with sore development. We have prospectively identified risk factors for pressure sores.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Follow-up chest roentgenograms are a commonly performed test. We prospectively evaluated their diagnostic and therapeutic influence at a tertiary care teaching hospital. When a follow-up chest roentgenogram was ordered, physicians indicated their reason for ordering the test, the likelihood that the roentgenogram would show changes, and expected alterations in therapy. After the roentgenogram was obtained, physicians described the help provided by the roentgenogram and what changes in therapy were performed. Using receiver operating characteristic curves, we have shown that physicians have difficulty in predicting which roentgenograms will show important changes. Unexpected findings are frequent (25.4%) and highly valued by the physician. Fifty-seven percent of these roentgenograms had a definite or possible influence on patient treatment. Further studies are indicated to define when follow-up chest roentgenograms are likely to be of benefit.