In the autumn of 2017, a public dispute broke out among certain physician specialty societies in the United States. At issue was a new, more stringent definition of hypertension (high blood ...pressure), coupled with more exacting targets for control in both younger and older adults (Whelton et al. 2018). The new guidelines, from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association, received widespread media attention. “Few risk factors are as important to health” as blood pressure, intoned an article in the New York Times, noting that approximately half of all adults would find themselves possible candidates for pharmacotherapy under the new recommendations (Kolata 2017). Generalist medical societies, however, which had published guidelines for older adults earlier in the year, expressed concern and declined to endorse the new standards. A representative from the American Academy of Family Physicians, for instance, claimed the scientific high ground, asserting, “With competing guide lines and recommendations, family physicians have an opportunity to be a guiding light in the darkness of confusion to deliver quality care that’s grounded in science and is patient-centered” (Crawford 2017).
The COVID-19 pandemic is devastating post-acute and long-term care (PA/LTC). As geriatricians practicing in PA/LTC and a regional academic medical center, we created this program for collaboration ...between academic medical centers and regional PA/LTC facilities. The mission of the Geriatric Engagement and Resource Integration in Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Facilities (GERI-PaL) program is to support optimal care of residents in PA/LTC facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. There are 5 main components of our program: (1) Project ECHO; (2) nursing liaisons; (3) infection advisory consultation; (4) telemedicine consultation; and (5) resident social contact remote connections. Implementation of this program has had positive response from our local PA/LTC facilities. A key component of our program is our interprofessional team, which includes physicians and nursing, emergency response, and public health experts. With diverse professional backgrounds, our team members have created a new model for academic medical centers to collaborate with local PA/LTC facilities.
The vulnerability of postacute and long-term care (PA/LTC) facility residents to COVID-19 has manifested across the world with increasing facility outbreaks associated with high hospitalization and ...mortality rates. Systematic protocols to guide telehealth-centered interventions in response to COVID-19 outbreaks have yet to be delineated. This article is intended to inform PA/LTC facilities and neighboring health care partners how to collaboratively utilize telehealth-centered strategies to improve outcomes in facility outbreaks.
: The University of Virginia rapidly developed a multidisciplinary telehealth-centered COVID-19 facility outbreak strategy in response to a LTC facility outbreak in which 41 (out of 48) facility residents and 7 staff members tested positive. This strategy focused on supporting the facility team remotely using rapidly deployed technologic solutions. Goals included (1) early identification of patients who need their care escalated, (2) monitoring and treating patients deemed safe to remain in the facility, (3) care coordination to facilitate bidirectional transfers between the skilled nursing facility (SNF) and hospital, and (4) daily facility needs assessment related to technology, infection control, and staff well-being. To achieve these goals, a standardized approach centered on daily multidisciplinary virtual rounds and telemedicine consultation was provided.
Over a month since the outbreak began, 18 out of 48 (38%) facility residents required hospitalization and 6 (12.5%) died. Eleven facility residents have since returned back to the SNF after recovering from their hospitalization. No staff required hospitalization.
Interventions that reduce hospitalizations and mortality are a critical need during the COVID-19 pandemic. The mortality and hospitalization rates seen in this PA/LTC facility outbreak are significantly lower than has been documented in other facility outbreaks. Our multidisciplinary approach centered on telemedicine should be considered as other PA/LTC facilities partner with neighboring health care systems in responding to COVID-19 outbreaks. We have begun replicating these services to additional PA/LTC facilities facing COVID-19 outbreaks.
IntroductionA broad range of stakeholders have called for randomised evidence on the potential clinical benefits and harms of proton therapy, a type of radiation therapy, for patients with breast ...cancer. Radiation therapy is an important component of curative treatment, reducing cancer recurrence and extending survival. Compared with photon therapy, the international treatment standard, proton therapy reduces incidental radiation to the heart. Our overall objective is to evaluate whether the differences between proton and photon therapy cardiac radiation dose distributions lead to meaningful reductions in cardiac morbidity and mortality after treatment for breast cancer.MethodsWe are conducting a large scale, multicentre pragmatic randomised clinical trial for patients with breast cancer who will be followed longitudinally for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, health-related quality of life and cancer control outcomes. A total of 1278 patients with non-metastatic breast cancer will be randomly allocated to receive either photon or proton therapy. The primary outcomes are major cardiovascular events, defined as myocardial infarction, coronary revascularisation, cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for unstable angina, heart failure, valvular disease, arrhythmia or pericardial disease. Secondary endpoints are urgent or unanticipated outpatient or emergency room visits for heart failure, arrhythmia, valvular disease or pericardial disease. The Radiotherapy Comparative Effectiveness (RadComp) Clinical Events Centre will conduct centralised, blinded adjudication of primary outcome events.Ethics and disseminationThe RadComp trial has been approved by the institutional review boards of all participating sites. Recruitment began in February 2016. Current version of the protocol is A3, dated 08 November 2018. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, stakeholder engagement efforts and presentation to the public via lay media outlets.Trial registration number NCT02603341
The National Pediatric Readiness Project is a US initiative to improve emergency department (ED) readiness to care for acutely ill and injured children. However, it is unclear whether high ED ...pediatric readiness is associated with improved survival in US trauma centers.
To evaluate the association between ED pediatric readiness, in-hospital mortality, and in-hospital complications among injured children presenting to US trauma centers.
A retrospective cohort study of 832 EDs in US trauma centers in 50 states and the District of Columbia was conducted using data from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2017. Injured children younger than 18 years who were admitted, transferred, or with injury-related death in a participating trauma center were included in the analysis. Subgroups included children with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 16 or above, indicating overall seriously injured (accounting for all injuries); any Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score of 3 or above, indicating at least 1 serious injury; a head AIS score of 3 or above, indicating serious brain injury; and need for early use of critical resources.
Emergency department pediatric readiness for the initial ED visit, measured through the weighted Pediatric Readiness Score (range, 0-100) from the 2013 National Pediatric Readiness Project ED pediatric readiness assessment.
In-hospital mortality, with a secondary composite outcome of in-hospital mortality or complication. For the primary measurement tools used, the possible range of the AIS is 0 to 6, with 3 or higher indicating a serious injury; the possible range of the ISS is 0 to 75, with 16 or higher indicating serious overall injury. The weighted Pediatric Readiness Score examines and scores 6 domains; in this study, the lowest quartile included scores of 29 to 62 and the highest quartile included scores of 93 to 100.
There were 372 004 injured children (239 273 64.3% boys; median age, 10 years interquartile range, 4-15 years), including 5700 (1.5%) who died in-hospital and 5018 (1.3%) who developed in-hospital complications. Subgroups included 50 440 children (13.6%) with an ISS of 16 or higher, 124 507 (33.5%) with any AIS score of 3 or higher, 57 368 (15.4%) with a head AIS score of 3 or higher, and 32 671 (8.8%) requiring early use of critical resources. Compared with EDs in the lowest weighted Pediatric Readiness Score quartile, children cared for in the highest ED quartile had lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio aOR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.75), but not fewer complications (aOR for the composite outcome 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.04). These findings were consistent across subgroups, strata, and multiple sensitivity analyses. If all children cared for in the lowest-readiness quartiles (1-3) were treated in an ED in the highest quartile of readiness, an additional 126 lives (95% CI, 97-154 lives) might be saved each year in these trauma centers.
In this cohort study, injured children treated in high-readiness EDs had lower mortality compared with similar children in low-readiness EDs, but not fewer complications. These findings support national efforts to increase ED pediatric readiness in US trauma centers that care for children.
PDF
