Objectives: to compare changes over time in the in-hospital mortality and the mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge for six highly prevalent discharge diagnoses in acutely admitted older patients as well as to assess the effect of separately analysing the in-hospital mortality and the mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge.Study design and setting: retrospective analysis of Dutch hospital and mortality data collected between 2000 and 2010.Subjects: the participants included 263,746 people, aged 65 years and above, who were acutely admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia or hip fracture.Methods: we compared changes in the in-hospital mortality and mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge in the Netherlands using a logistic- and a multinomial regression model.Results: for all six diagnoses, the mortality from admission to 30 days post-discharge declined between 2000 and 2009. The decline ranged from a relative risk ratio (RRR) of 0.41 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38–0.45] for AMI to 0.77 [0.73–0.82] for HF. In separate analyses, the in-hospital mortality decreased for all six diagnoses. The mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge in 2009 compared to 2000 depended on the diagnosis, and either declined, remained unchanged or increased.Conclusions: the decline in hospital mortality in acutely admitted older patients was largely attributable to the lower in-hospital mortality, while the change in the mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge depended on the diagnosis. Separately reporting the two rate estimates might be more informative than providing an overall hospital mortality rate.
Objective: This study aims to assess the comparative effectiveness of a conventional splitting needle or a peelable cannula vs. the modified Seldinger technique (MST) by utilizing a dedicated micro-insertion kit across various clinically significant metrics, including insertion success, complications, and catheter-related infections. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using an anonymized data set spanning 3 years (2017-2019) in a large tertiary-level neonatal intensive care unit in Qatar. Results: A total of 1,445 peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) insertion procedures were included in the analysis, of which 1,285 (89%) were successful. The primary indication for insertion was mainly determined by the planned therapy duration, with the saphenous vein being the most frequently selected blood vessel. The patients exposed to MST were generally younger (7 ± 15 days vs. 11 ± 26 days), but exhibited similar mean weights and gestational ages. Although not statistically significant, the MST demonstrated slightly higher overall and first-attempt insertion success rates compared to conventional methods (91 vs. 88%). However, patients undergoing conventional insertion techniques experienced a greater incidence of catheter-related complications (p < 0.001). There were 39 cases of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in the conventional group (3.45/1,000 catheter days) and eight cases in the MST group (1.06/1,000 catheter days), indicating a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). Throughout the study period, there was a noticeable shift toward the utilization of the MST kit for PICC insertions. Conclusion: The study underscores the viability of MST facilitated by an all-in-one micro kit for neonatal PICC insertion. Utilized by adept and trained inserters, this approach is associated with improved first-attempt success rates, decreased catheter-related complications, and fewer incidences of CLABSI. However, while these findings are promising, it is imperative to recognize potential confounding factors. Therefore, additional prospective multicenter studies are recommended to substantiate these results and ascertain the comprehensive benefits of employing the all-in-one kit.
LINK
Introduction: Retrospective studies suggest that a rapid initiation of treatment results in a better prognosis for patients in the emergency department. There could be a difference between the actual medication administration time and the documented time in the electronic health record. In this study, the difference between the observed medication administration time and documentation time was investigated. Patient and nurse characteristics were also tested for associations with observed time differences. Methods: In this prospective study, emergency nurses were followed by observers for a total of 3 months. Patient inclusion was divided over 2 time periods. The difference in the observed medication administration time and the corresponding electronic health record documentation time was measured. The association between patient/nurse characteristics and the difference in medication administration and documentation time was tested with a Spearman correlation or biserial correlation test. Results: In 34 observed patients, the median difference in administration and documentation time was 6.0 minutes (interquartile range 2.0-16.0). In 9 (26.5%) patients, the actual time of medication administration differed more than 15 minutes with the electronic health record documentation time. High temperature, lower saturation, oxygen-dependency, and high Modified Early Warning Score were all correlated with an increasing difference between administration and documentation times. Discussion: A difference between administration and documentation times of medication in the emergency department may be common, especially for more acute patients. This could bias, in part, previously reported time-to-treatment measurements from retrospective research designs, which should be kept in mind when outcomes of retrospective time-to-treatment studies are evaluated.
