Biomedical subjects

Louis G Graff

Publications and source records attributed to Louis G Graff.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Delay in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction: effect on quality of care and its assessment.

BACKGROUND: Delay in diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) may affect quality of care and its assessment. OBJECTIVES: To examine over time the frequency of delay in AMI diagnosis and the effect of this delay on the quality of patient care and its assessment. METHODS: The authors examined the trend in coded admission diagnosis, age, comorbidities, procedures during hospitalization, and discharge status for 42,406 Connecticut Medicare cases with the principal discharge diagnosis of AMI for the time period 1992 through 2001. For 2,583 cases discharged in 1992 and 1993 and for 1,398 cases discharged in 1998 through 2001, the rates of administration of aspirin (ASA) and beta blocker (BB) on admission and discharge, by admission diagnosis, were ascertained. RESULTS: For patients discharged with the principal diagnosis of AMI over the decade examined, the proportion with this diagnosis on admission fell (59% to 40%, p < 0.001), the proportion with a non-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admission diagnosis rose (18% to 26%, p < 0.001), and the population aged (proportion older than 85 years of age increased from 16% to 28%, p < 0.001). Patients with ACS as the admission diagnosis more frequently received cardiac catheterization (during 2000-2001, 39% versus 17%, p < 0.001), percutaneous coronary intervention (19% versus 4%, p < 0.001), and evidence-based therapy; during 1998-2001, opportunities to give ASA or BB on admission were fulfilled for 88% versus 73% (p < 0.001), and on discharge, for 87% versus 74% (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of AMI is delayed after admission for a significant proportion of cases who receive care that is measured to be of lower quality. There is a need to more effectively diagnose and treat these cases with delayed diagnosis and to develop new quality measures to address changes in the characteristics of patients who are hospitalized with AMI.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed2006

Factors associated with the hospitalization of low-risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia in a cluster-randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Many low-risk patients with pneumonia are hospitalized despite recommendations to treat such patients in the outpatient setting. OBJECTIVE: To identify the factors associated with the hospitalization of low-risk patients with pneumonia. METHODS: We analyzed data collected by retrospective chart review for 1,889 low-risk patients (Pneumonia Severity Index [PSI] risk classes I to III without evidence of arterial oxygen desaturation) enrolled in a cluster-randomized trial conducted in 32 emergency departments. RESULTS: Overall, 845 (44.7%) of all low-risk patients were treated as inpatients. Factors independently associated with an increased odds of hospitalization included PSI risk classes II and III, the presence of medical or psychosocial contraindications to outpatient treatment, comorbid conditions that were not contained in the PSI (cognitive impairment, history of coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, or pulmonary disease), multilobar radiographic infiltrates, and home therapy with oxygen, corticosteroids, or antibiotics before presentation. While 32.8% of low-risk inpatients had a contraindication to outpatient treatment and 47.1% had one or more preexisting treatments, comorbid conditions, or radiographic abnormalities not contained in the PSI, 20.1% had no identifiable risk factors for hospitalization other than PSI risk class II or III. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital admission appears justified for one-third of low-risk inpatients based upon the presence of one or more contraindications to outpatient treatment. At least one-fifth of low-risk inpatients did not have a contraindication to outpatient treatment or an identifiable risk factor for hospitalization, suggesting that treatment of a larger proportion of such low-risk patients in the outpatient setting could be achieved without adversely affecting patient outcomes.

Cluster Analysis↗

PubMed2005

Effect of increasing the intensity of implementing pneumonia guidelines: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the development of evidence-based pneumonia guidelines, limited data exist on the most effective means to implement guideline recommendations into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of 3 guideline implementation strategies. DESIGN: Cluster-randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: 32 emergency departments in Pennsylvania and Connecticut. PATIENTS: 3219 patients with a clinical and radiographic diagnosis of pneumonia. INTERVENTIONS: The authors implemented a project-developed guideline for the initial site of treatment based on the Pneumonia Severity Index and performance of evidence-based processes of care at the emergency department level. Guideline implementation strategies were defined as low (n = 8), moderate (n = 12), and high intensity (n = 12). MEASUREMENTS: Effectiveness outcomes were the rate at which low-risk patients were treated on an outpatient basis and the performance of recommended processes of care. Safety outcomes included death, subsequent hospitalization for outpatients, and medical complications for inpatients. RESULTS: More low-risk patients (n = 1901) were treated as outpatients in the moderate-intensity and high-intensity groups than in the low-intensity group (high-intensity group, 61.9%; moderate-intensity group, 61.0%; low-intensity group, 37.5%; P = 0.004). More outpatients (n = 1125) in the high-intensity group received all 4 recommended processes of care (high-intensity group, 60.9%; moderate-intensity group, 28.3%; low-intensity group, 25.3%; P < 0.001); more inpatients (n = 2076) in the high-intensity group received all 4 recommended processes of care (high-intensity group, 44.3%; moderate-intensity group, 30.1%; low-intensity group, 23.0%; P < 0.001). No statistically significant differences in safety outcomes were observed across interventions. LIMITATIONS: Twenty percent of eligible patients were not enrolled, and data on effectiveness outcomes were not collected before the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Both moderate-intensity and high-intensity guideline implementation strategies safely increased the proportion of low-risk patients with pneumonia who were treated as outpatients. The high-intensity strategy was most effective for increasing the performance of the recommended processes of care for outpatients and inpatients.

Aged↗

PubMed2005

Prospective comparison of three validated prediction rules for prognosis in community-acquired pneumonia.

PURPOSE: We assessed the performance of 3 validated prognostic rules in predicting 30-day mortality in community-acquired pneumonia: the 20 variable Pneumonia Severity Index and the easier to calculate CURB (confusion, urea nitrogen, respiratory rate, blood pressure) and CURB-65 severity scores. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We prospectively followed 3181 patients with community-acquired pneumonia from 32 hospital emergency departments (January-December 2001) and assessed mortality 30 days after initial presentation. Patients were stratified into Pneumonia Severity Index risk classes (I-V) and CURB (0-4) and CURB-65 (0-5) risk strata. We compared the discriminatory power (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of these rules to predict mortality and their accuracy based on sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios. RESULTS: The Pneumonia Severity Index (risk classes I-III) classified a greater proportion of patients as low risk (68% [2152/3181]) than either a CURB score <1 (51% [1635/3181]) or a CURB-65 score <2 (61% [1952/3181]). Low-risk patients identified based on the Pneumonia Severity Index had a slightly lower mortality (1.4% [31/2152]) than patients classified as low-risk based on the CURB (1.7% [28/1635]) or the CURB-65 (1.7% [33/1952]). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was higher for the Pneumonia Severity Index (0.81) than for either the CURB (0.73) or CURB-65 (0.76) scores (P <0.001, for each pairwise comparison). At comparable cut-points, the Pneumonia Severity Index had a higher sensitivity and a somewhat higher negative predictive value for mortality than either CURB score. CONCLUSIONS: The more complex Pneumonia Severity Index has a higher discriminatory power for short-term mortality, defines a greater proportion of patients at low risk, and is slightly more accurate in identifying patients at low risk than either CURB score.

Aged↗

PubMed2005

Using randomized controlled trial data, the agreement between retrospectively and prospectively collected data comprising the pneumonia severity index was substantial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the agreement between prospectively and retrospectively determined variables comprising the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), assignment to PSI risk class, and designation as low risk, based on these two methods of data collection. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We analyzed data from a randomized trial of patients with community-acquired pneumonia managed in 32 hospital emergency departments (EDs). For all enrolled patients, the 20 PSI variables were collected prospectively by ED providers and retrospectively by medical record abstractors. We examined the agreement for each of the 20 PSI variables, assignment to the five PSI risk classes, and classification of patients as low (classes I-III) vs. high (classes IV and V) risk. Agreement was measured using total percent agreement and the kappa statistic. RESULTS: Among the 3,220 enrolled patients, percent agreement was >90% for 18 of the 20 variables comprising the PSI, with most unweighted kappa's being >0.6. Agreement was substantial for assignment to PSI risk class (percent agreement: 92.7%; weighted kappa: 0.79) and for classification as low vs. high risk (percent agreement: 88.5%; unweighted kappa: 0.74). CONCLUSION: There was substantial agreement between retrospective and prospective assignment to PSI risk class, classification as low vs. high risk, and the determination of most individual variables that constitute the PSI.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2005

Dissemination of an evidence-based multicomponent fall risk-assessment and -management strategy throughout a geographic area.

OBJECTIVES: To report on the penetration of, and identified barriers to and facilitators of, efforts to incorporate evidence-based fall risk assessment and management into clinical practice throughout a defined geographic area. DESIGN: Dissemination project. SETTING: North central Connecticut. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitals, home care agencies, primary care providers, and outpatient rehabilitation facilities. INTERVENTION: Multiple professional behavior-change strategies were used to encourage providers to incorporate evidence-based fall assessment and management into their practices. MEASUREMENTS: Penetration of dissemination efforts over 36 months; barriers and facilitators identified by provider working groups during the first 2 years of the project. RESULTS: All seven hospitals and 26 home care agencies in the area, 119 of 130 rehabilitation facilities, and 138 of 212 primary care offices participated. Most provider working groups expressed similar barriers and facilitating factors. Reported barriers specific to fall risk management included lack of awareness of fall morbidity and preventability, perceived lack of expertise and Medicare coverage, inadequate referral patterns among providers, and lack of a federal mandate for physicians. Facilitating factors specific to falls included the opportunity to market new services and to develop new networks of professional relationships across disciplines and the Medicare mandate that home care agencies focus on functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: Dissemination efforts showed notable successes as well as challenges. Although many of the barriers were general to diffusing new practices, several were specific to fall assessment and management that span disciplines and sites. Project results have implications for efforts to diffuse evidence-based practices for multifactorial geriatric conditions such as falls.

Accidental Falls↗

PubMed2004

The emergency department community-acquired pneumonia trial: Methodology of a quality improvement intervention.

Community-acquired pneumonia causes more than 4 million episodes of illness each year and has high morbidity, mortality, and total cost of care. Nationwide, nearly 75% of community-acquired pneumonia patients are initially evaluated and treated in hospital-based emergency departments (EDs). Substantial variation exists in illness severity assessment, hospital admission decisions, and performance of recommended processes of care. We designed an ED-based quality improvement trial focused on the initial care of patients with community-acquired pneumonia. We used the Pneumonia Severity Index and level of arterial oxygenation to identify patients at low risk for 30-day mortality and to guide admission decisionmaking. We assessed the performance of recommended "best practices," consisting of assessment of arterial oxygenation, the collection of blood cultures for inpatients, and the timely initiation of appropriate empiric antibiotic therapy for inpatients and outpatients. We conducted a 32-site, cluster-randomized trial in Pennsylvania and Connecticut, comparing the effectiveness and safety of 3 guideline implementation strategies of increasing intensity. The multifaceted implementation plans were carried out in conjunction with each state's quality improvement organization. This article describes the background, objectives, and methodology of this trial to translate evidence-based knowledge on the quality and efficiency of care for community-acquired pneumonia into clinical practice.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗