Biomedical subjects

Nancy Neil

Publications and source records attributed to Nancy Neil.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Liposomal doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide and antiretroviral therapy for patients with AIDS-related lymphoma: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate in a pilot study the safety and efficacy of liposomal doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide (LACE) when combined with antiretroviral therapy (ART) in patients with AIDS-related lymphoma (ARL). The impact of HIV viral control on therapy and survival was also assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1994 and 2005, 40 patients at Virginia Mason Medical Center were diagnosed with ARL. Twelve received LACE every 28 days. All patients received intrathecal chemoprophylaxis, ART, and G-CSF. RESULTS: The median patient CD4+ count was 190 cells/microl (range, 20-510 cells/microl), and the median HIV viral load (VL) was 61,613 copies/ml (range, <50-500,000 copies/ml). Seven patients (58%) had an International Prognostic Index score of 3 or 4. Six patients (50%) were ART-naïve, five were viremic despite ART, and one had an undetectable HIV-1 VL. Nine patients (75%) achieved a complete response (CR), and median overall survival was 107 months. At a median follow-up of 46 months, the recurrence-free survival rate was 50%. Two patients died from relapsed/refractory ARL and one patient achieved a CR with salvage therapy. One CR patient died from complications of pneumonia, and another CR patient died from uncertain causes 5 years after treatment. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurred in 23 of 61 (38%) chemotherapy cycles. Hospitalization was required after 5% of treatment cycles due to neutropenic fever. CONCLUSION: LACE is an effective and tolerable treatment for ARL. HIV viral control can be maintained in the majority of patients during and after completion of LACE.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Retrospective analysis of suspending HAART in selected patients with controlled HIV replication.

We sought to determine the consequences of stopping highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in a group of 41 HIV-infected individuals with undetectable HIV viral loads and CD4+ counts greater than 500 cells per microliter for 6 months or more. Clinical and laboratory parameters were monitored, as was the time to HAART reinitiation. Three months after HAART interruption, the median CD4+ count declined by 162 cells per microliter and HIV viral load increased by 24,000 copies per milliliter. Over the next year, CD4+ counts continued to decrease by an average of 11 cells per microliter per 3-month intervals. In contrast, HIV viral loads remained stable over the same period. Five of 7 patients (71%) with elevated cholesterol levels and 6 of 13 patients (46%) with elevated triglyceride levels had these values normalize after stopping HAART. After a median of 21 months follow-up, 26 of 41 patients (63%) have restarted HAART. Patients with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) HIV/AIDS C classification were more likely to restart HAART than those with A or B classification (p = 0.008). Reasons for HAART restart included clinical events in 8 patients. Fifteen patients restarted HAART for immunologic reasons: CD4+ count less than 300 cells per microliter (n = 7); HIV viral load greater than 55,000 copies per milliliter (n = 3); or both (n = 5). Three patients restarted HAART because of personal preference. Within 4 months, all 26 patients who restarted HAART achieved HIV viral loads less than 50 copies per milliliter. Although patients were able to rapidly achieve nondetectable HIV viral loads after restarting HAART, the inability to foresee clinical events among 8 patients (20%) is disconcerting. We advise caution before HAART interruption, particularly for those patients with a preceding history of significant HIV-related complications.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Learning to leverage existing information systems: Part 1. Principles.

BACKGROUND: The success of performance improvement efforts depends on effective measurement and feedback regarding clinical processes and outcomes. Yet most health care organizations have fragmented rather than integrated data systems. Methods and practical guidance are provided for leveraging available information sources to obtain and create valid performance improvement-related information for use by clinicians and administrators. CASE VIGNETTE: At Virginia Mason Health System (VMHS; Seattle), a vertically integrated hospital and multispecialty group practice, patient records are paper based and are supplemented with electronic reporting for laboratory and radiology services. Despite growth in the resources and interest devoted to organization-wide performance measurement, quality improvement, and evidence-based tools, VMHS's information systems consist of largely stand-alone, legacy systems organized around the ability to retrieve information on patients, one at a time. By 2002, without any investment in technology, VMHS had developed standardized, clinic-wide key indicators of performance updated and reported regularly at the patient, provider, site, and organizational levels. LEVERAGING EXISTING SYSTEMS: On the basis of VHMS's experience, principles can be suggested to guide other organizations to explore solutions using their own information systems: for example, start simply, but start; identify information needs; tap multiple data streams; and improve incrementally.

Data Collection↗

PubMed2003

Learning to leverage existing information systems: Part 2. Case studies.

BACKGROUND: The ability to use available administrative and clinical information to produce performance reports is a key element of quality improvement. Six health care systems were identified that have done a particularly effective or innovative job of creating and implementing performance measurement tools and systems by using data available in existing clinical and administrative information systems: Dean Health System (Madison, WI), Sharp HealthCare (San Diego), Henry Ford Health System (Detroit), Scripps Health (San Diego), Legacy Health System (Portland, OR), and Lovelace Health System (Albuquerque). SUMMARY THOUGHTS: Interest in comparative performance information for health care organizations remains strong. The perfect measure set has not yet been invented. Every measure has one or more flaws, as do the data systems available to support them. Managers may take comfort, however, in the knowledge that performance measures need not be perfect to be useful. Measures tend to improve when people use the data to inform decisions that matter. Even the most accurate data, though, are not useful if there is either too much or too little "organizational distance" between the unit of analysis for the data and the unit of control for making change. Some systems have adopted a layered approach to performance measurement, in which measures are aggregated for reporting and use at the level of major operating units or divisions and then disaggregated for reporting and use at smaller levels and eventually to the level of individual clinicians.

California↗

PubMed2003

Improving rates of screening and prevention by leveraging existing information systems.

BACKGROUND: In 1997 Virginia Mason Health System (VMMC), a vertically integrated hospital and multispecialty group practice, had no process or system to deliver the right patient clinical data, in the right form, at the right place--when providers needed it for effective patient care. Without any new investment in technology, a work group of five individuals leveraged existing, primarily paper-based information systems to launch development and implementation of a provider prompting tool--a primary care and prevention (PCP) report--which prompted providers to complete screening, prevention, and disease management services at every patient appointment. PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTING THE TOOL: The work group developed and pilot tested the report and created a mechanism by which the report could be delivered just in time before each patient's appointment. The report integrated information from independent appointment scheduling, laboratory results reporting, patient demographics, and billing data sources. MEASURING THE PCP REPORT'S IMPACT: The results of two separate analyses demonstrate improvement in rates of screening and prevention across VMMC soon after the PCP report became available. These results led senior leadership to make the PCP report's utilization a systemwide imperative. DISCUSSION: The PCP report is used by nearly all primary care providers as a prompt to complete screening, prevention, and disease management services at every patient appointment.

Appointments and Schedules↗

PubMed2003

Clinical and economic outcomes of multivessel coronary stenting compared with bypass surgery: a single-center US experience.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials comparing multivessel stenting with coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) have demonstrated similar rates of death and myocardial infarction but higher rates of repeat revascularization after stenting. The impact of these alternative strategies on overall medical care costs is uncertain, particularly within the US health care system. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, matched cohort study to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of multivessel stenting and bypass surgery. The stent group consisted of 100 consecutive patients who underwent stenting of >or=2 major native coronary arteries at our institution. The CABG group consisted of 200 patients who underwent nonemergent isolated bypass surgery during the same time frame, matched (2:1) for age, sex, ejection fraction, diabetes mellitus, and extent of coronary disease. Detailed clinical follow-up and resource utilization data were collected for a minimum of 2 years. Total costs were calculated by use of year 2000 unit prices. RESULTS: Over a median follow up period of 2.8 years, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality rates (3.0% vs 3.0%), Q-wave myocardial infarction (5.1% vs 4.0%), or the composite of death or myocardial infarction (7.1% vs 7.0%) between the stent and CABG groups (P = not significant for all comparisons). However, at 2-year follow up, patients with stents were more likely to require >or=1 repeat revascularization procedure (32.0% vs 4.5%, P <.001). The initial cost of multivessel stenting was 43% less than the cost of CABG (11,810 dollars vs 20,574 dollars, P <.001) and remained 27% less (17,634 dollars vs 24,288 dollars, P =.005) at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Multivessel stenting and CABG result in comparable risks of death and myocardial infarction. Despite a higher rate of repeat revascularization, multivessel stenting was significantly less costly than CABG through the first 2 years of follow-up.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗

PubMed2002

Resource utilization, cost, and health status impacts of coronary stent versus "optimal" percutaneous coronary angioplasty: results from the OPUS-I trial.

In the OPUS-I trial, primary coronary stent implantation reduced 6-month composite incidence of death, myocardial infarction, cardiac surgery, or target vessel revascularization relative to a strategy of initial PTCA with provisional stenting in patients undergoing single vessel coronary angioplasty. The purpose of this research was to compare the economic and health status impacts of each treatment strategy. Resource utilization data were collected for the 479 patients randomized in OPUS-I. Itemized cost estimates were derived from primary hospital charge data gathered in previous multicenter trials evaluating coronary stents, and adjusted to approximate 1997 Medicare-based costs for a cardiac population. Health status at 6 months was assessed using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). Initial procedure related costs for patients treated with a primary stent strategy were higher than those treated with optimal PTCA/provisional stent ($5,389 vs $4,339, P < 0.001). Costs of initial hospitalization were also higher for patients in the primary stent group ($9,234 vs $8,434, P < 0.01) chiefly because of the cost differences in the index revascularization. Mean 6-month costs were similar in the two groups; however, there was a slight cost advantage associated with primary stenting. Bootstrap replication of 6-month cost data sustained the economic attractiveness of the primary stent strategy. There were no differences in SAQ scores between treatment groups. In patients undergoing single vessel coronary angioplasty, routine stent implantation improves important clinical outcomes at comparable, or even reduced cost, compared to a strategy of initial balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting.

Adult↗