On March 17, 2020, a member of a Skagit County, Washington, choir informed Skagit County Public Health (SCPH) that several members of the 122-member choir had become ill. Three persons, two from ...Skagit County and one from another area, had test results positive for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Another 25 persons had compatible symptoms. SCPH obtained the choir's member list and began an investigation on March 18. Among 61 persons who attended a March 10 choir practice at which one person was known to be symptomatic, 53 cases were identified, including 33 confirmed and 20 probable cases (secondary attack rates of 53.3% among confirmed cases and 86.7% among all cases). Three of the 53 persons who became ill were hospitalized (5.7%), and two died (3.7%). The 2.5-hour singing practice provided several opportunities for droplet and fomite transmission, including members sitting close to one another, sharing snacks, and stacking chairs at the end of the practice. The act of singing, itself, might have contributed to transmission through emission of aerosols, which is affected by loudness of vocalization (1). Certain persons, known as superemitters, who release more aerosol particles during speech than do their peers, might have contributed to this and previously reported COVID-19 superspreading events (2-5). These data demonstrate the high transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 and the possibility of superemitters contributing to broad transmission in certain unique activities and circumstances. It is recommended that persons avoid face-to-face contact with others, not gather in groups, avoid crowded places, maintain physical distancing of at least 6 feet to reduce transmission, and wear cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain.
Nursing homes became epicenters of COVID-19 in the spring of 2020. Due to the substantial case fatality rates within congregate settings, federal agencies recommended restrictions to family visits. ...Six months into the COVID-19 pandemic, these largely remain in place. The objective of this study was to generate consensus guidance statements focusing on essential family caregivers and visitors.
A modified 2-step Delphi process was used to generate consensus statements.
The Delphi panel consisted of 21 US and Canadian post-acute and long-term care experts in clinical medicine, administration, and patient care advocacy.
State and federal reopening statements were collected in June 2020 and the panel voted on these using a 3-point Likert scale with consensus defined as ≥80% of panel members voting "Agree." The consensus statements then informed development of the visitor guidance statements.
The Delphi process yielded 77 consensus statements. Regarding visitor guidance, the panel made 5 strong recommendations: (1) maintain strong infection prevention and control precautions, (2) facilitate indoor and outdoor visits, (3) allow limited physical contact with appropriate precautions, (4) assess individual residents' care preferences and level of risk tolerance, and (5) dedicate an essential caregiver and extend the definition of compassionate care visits to include care that promotes psychosocial well-being of residents.
The COVID-19 pandemic has seen substantial regulatory changes without strong consideration of the impact on residents. In the absence of timely and rigorous research, the involvement of clinicians and patient care advocates is important to help create the balance between individual resident preferences and the health of the collective. The results of this evidence-based Delphi process will help guide policy decisions as well as inform future research.
Lynn claims that in recent times, people have used to bring reform to what happens in the last part of their lives and to the language of decision making and law. She lays out the framework for a ...promising approach to reform. Among other things, she says that society could build care arrangements around the major patterns of decline and dying by estimating and arranging the care needs to have them available at the right time.
To ascertain whether changes occurred in medical student exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions from 2003-2012, which factors influence exposure and attitudes, and whether exposure ...and attitudes influence future plans to interact with drug companies.
In 2012, the authors surveyed 1,269 third-year students at eight U.S. medical schools. Items explored student exposure to, attitudes toward, and future plans regarding drug company interactions. The authors compared 2012 survey data with their 2003 survey data from third-year students at the same schools.
The 2012 response rate was 68.2% (866/1,269). Compared with 2003, in 2012, students were significantly less frequently exposed to interactions (1.6/month versus 4.1/month, P < .001), less likely to feel entitled to gifts (41.8% versus 80.3%, P < .001), and more apt to feel gifts could influence them (44.3% versus 31.2%, P < .001). In 2012, 545/839 students (65.0%) reported private outpatient offices were the main location of exposure to pharmaceutical representatives, despite spending only 18.4% of their clerkship-rotation time there. In 2012, 310/703 students (44.1%) were unaware their schools had rules restricting interactions, and 467/837 (55.8%) planned to interact with pharmaceutical representatives during residency.
Students in 2012 had less exposure to drug company interactions and were more likely to have skeptical attitudes than students in 2003. These changes are consistent with national organizations' recommendations to limit and teach about these interactions. Continued efforts to study and influence students' and physician role models' exposures to and attitudes about drug companies are warranted.
Quality improvement (QI) activities can improve health care but must be conducted ethically. The Hastings Center convened leaders and scholars to address ethical requirements for QI and their ...relationship to regulations protecting human subjects of research. The group defined QI as systematic, data-guided activities designed to bring about immediate improvements in health care delivery in particular settings and concluded that QI is an intrinsic part of normal health care operations. Both clinicians and patients have an ethical responsibility to participate in QI, provided that it complies with specified ethical requirements. Most QI activities are not human subjects research and should not undergo review by an institutional review board; rather, appropriately calibrated supervision of QI activities should be part of professional supervision of clinical practice. The group formulated a framework that would use key characteristics of a project and its context to categorize it as QI, human subjects research, or both, with the potential of a customized institutional review board process for the overlap category. The group recommended a period of innovation and evaluation to refine the framework for ethical conduct of QI and to integrate that framework into clinical practice.
Profiles of Older Medicare Decedents Lunney, June R.; Lynn, Joanne; Hogan, Christopher
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS),
June 2002, Letnik:
50, Številka:
6
Journal Article
Recenzirano
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usefulness of a clinical scheme to classify older decedents to better understand the issues associated with healthcare use and costs in the last year of life.
DESIGN: We ...analyzed Medicare claims data for a random sample of 0.1% of all Medicare beneficiaries with expenditures between 1993 and 1998. This sample yielded 7,966 deaths.
SETTING: Medicare claims data.
PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries.
MEASUREMENTS: We classified decedents into groups representing four trajectories at the end of life: sudden death, terminal illness, organ failure, and frailty.
RESULTS: Ninety‐two percent of decedents were captured by the profiling strategy. The four trajectory groups had distinct patterns of demographics, care delivery, and Medicare expenditures. Frailty was a dominant pattern, with 47% of all decedents, whereas sudden death claimed only 7%; cancer claimed 22%, and organ system failure, 16%.
CONCLUSIONS: The clinical scheme to classify decedents appears to fit most decedents and to form groups with substantial clinical differences. Acknowledging the differences among these groups may be a fruitful way to evaluate expenditures and develop strategies to improve care at the end of life.
PDF
