Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Am J Emerg Med ; 69: 5-10, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20244366

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Prior data have suggested that suboptimal antibiotic prescribing in the emergency department (ED) is common for uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI), urinary tract infections (UTI), and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). The objective of this study was to measure the effect of indication-based antibiotic order sentences (AOS) on optimal antibiotic prescribing in the ED. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved quasi-experiment of adults prescribed antibiotics in EDs for uncomplicated LRTI, UTI, or ABSSSI from January to June 2019 (pre-implementation) and September to December 2021 (post-implementation). AOS implementation occurred in July 2021. AOS are lean process, electronic discharge prescriptions retrievable by name or indication within the discharge order field. The primary outcome was optimal prescribing, defined as correct antibiotic selection, dose, and duration per local and national guidelines. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were performed; multivariable logistic regression was used to determine variables associated with optimal prescribing. RESULTS: A total of 294 patients were included: 147 pre-group and 147 post-group. Overall optimal prescribing improved from 12 (8%) to 34 (23%) (P < 0.001). Individual components of optimal prescribing were optimal selection at 90 (61%) vs 117 (80%) (P < 0.001), optimal dose at 99 (67%) vs 115 (78%) (P = 0.036), and optimal duration at 38 (26%) vs 50 (34%) (P = 0.13) for pre- and post-group, respectively. AOS was independently associated with optimal prescribing after multivariable logistic regression analysis (adjOR, 3.6; 95%CI,1.7-7.2). A post-hoc analysis showed low uptake of AOS by ED prescribers. CONCLUSIONS: AOS are an efficient and promising strategy to enhance antimicrobial stewardship in the ED.


Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship , Respiratory Tract Infections , Urinary Tract Infections , Adult , Humans , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Respiratory Tract Infections/drug therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital , Urinary Tract Infections/drug therapy , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Inappropriate Prescribing
2.
Am J Public Health ; 111(10): 1772-1775, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690609

ABSTRACT

Rapid identification and management of students with COVID-19 symptoms, exposure, or disease are critical to halting disease spread and protecting public health. We describe the interdisciplinary isolation and quarantine program of a large, public university, the University of Virginia, Charlottesville. The program provided students with wraparound services, including medical, mental health, academic, and other support services during their isolation or quarantine stay. The program successfully accommodated 844 cases during the fall 2020 semester, thereby decreasing exposure to the rest of the university and the local community. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(10):1772-1775. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306424).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Quarantine/psychology , Social Isolation/psychology , Students/psychology , Universities/organization & administration , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Patient Care Team , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Support , Virginia
3.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(8): 1151-1158, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1481184

ABSTRACT

The development of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines began in March 2020 in response to a request from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Within 4 days of the request, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel was established and the first meeting took place (virtually-as did subsequent meetings). The Panel comprises 57 individuals representing 6 governmental agencies, 11 professional societies, and 33 medical centers, plus 2 community members, who have worked together to create and frequently update the guidelines on the basis of evidence from the most recent clinical studies available. The initial version of the guidelines was completed within 2 weeks and posted online on 21 April 2020. Initially, sparse evidence was available to guide COVID-19 treatment recommendations. However, treatment data rapidly accrued based on results from clinical studies that used various study designs and evaluated different therapeutic agents and approaches. Data have continued to evolve at a rapid pace, leading to 24 revisions and updates of the guidelines in the first year. This process has provided important lessons for responding to an unprecedented public health emergency: Providers and stakeholders are eager to access credible, current treatment guidelines; governmental agencies, professional societies, and health care leaders can work together effectively and expeditiously; panelists from various disciplines, including biostatistics, are important for quickly developing well-informed recommendations; well-powered randomized clinical trials continue to provide the most compelling evidence to guide treatment recommendations; treatment recommendations need to be developed in a confidential setting free from external pressures; development of a user-friendly, web-based format for communicating with health care providers requires substantial administrative support; and frequent updates are necessary as clinical evidence rapidly emerges.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Advisory Committees , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Data Interpretation, Statistical , Drug Approval , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Humans , Interprofessional Relations , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2 , Stakeholder Participation , United States , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
4.
Teachers & Teaching ; : 1-18, 2021.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1475686

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic jolted teachers to the front line of complex, under resourced negotiation of quality distance learning, whilst also being key communicators with students and families about how to be COVID safe. Media reports debated preschool and school closures and child safety, but scarcely considered teachers. Motivated by the silencing of teachers and extraordinary changes to education, we gathered as a group of nine educational researchers located in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and U.S.A to create a survey platform for teachers’ lived experiences of the impact of COVID-19. Our survey asked 22 questions and attracted 624 responses. This article focuses on question 12: What are the issues you are struggling with and need support with? Drawing from Latour’s provocation we distil key ‘matters of concern’ from the data, illustrated by excerpts from teacher responses and echoed by the authors’ COVID lived experiences as interwoven blackout poetry. Our collated experiences highlight struggles with online learning, connectivity/communication with students and families, quality of teaching, and workload, and the need to value and invest in education and the professionalism of teachers to address these struggles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Teachers & Teaching is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

5.
NJ: Drama Australia Journal ; : 1-22, 2021.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1286509

ABSTRACT

As countries moved to halt the spread of the COVID 19 pandemic in 2020 access to physical sites of learning was restricted, so teachers across diverse educational contexts were required to rapidly embrace different modes and combinations of delivery. With a desire to profile the voices of teacher experience, a number of educational researchers initiated a research project to examine the experiences of teachers during COVID-19 times. The stories of performing arts teachers, revealed some shared areas of similar concern with other teachers – namely a rapid increase in using different technologies and online tools and an extensive increase in workload. Teachers expressed concern for those students who became ‘invisible’, and for the ‘invisible’ aspects of the classroom and learning that was difficult to replicate online. The research highlighted the importance of the ‘human dimensions’ of learning in these art forms and the important role played by professional networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of NJ: Drama Australia Journal is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

6.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 78(Supplement_3): S76-S82, 2021 Aug 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1243455

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Patients with a reported ß-lactam allergy (BLA) are often given alternative perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, increasing risk of surgical site infections (SSIs), acute kidney injury (AKI), and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). The purpose of this study was to implement and evaluate a pharmacist-led BLA clarification interview service in the preoperative setting. METHODS: A pharmacist performed BLA clarification telephone interviews before elective procedures from November 2018 to March 2019. On the basis of allergy history and a decision algorithm, first-line preoperative antibiotics, alternative antibiotics, or allergy testing referral was recommended. The pharmacist intervention (PI) group was compared to a standard of care (SOC) group who underwent surgery from November 2017 to March 2018. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were included, with 50 (57%) and 37 (43%) in the SOC and PI groups, respectively. The most common surgeries included orthopedic surgery in 41 patients (47%) and neurosurgery in 17 patients (20%). In the PI group, all BLA labels were updated after interview. Twenty-three patients were referred for allergy testing, 12 of the 23 (52%) completed BLA testing, and penicillin allergies were removed for 9 of the 12 patients. Overall, 28 of the 37 (76%) pharmacy antibiotic recommendations were accepted. Cefazolin use significantly increased from 28% to 65% after the intervention (P = 0.001). SSI occurred in 5 (10%) patients in the SOC group and no patients in the PI group (P = 0.051). All of these SSIs were associated with alternative antibiotics. Incidence of AKI and CDI was similar between the groups. No allergic reactions occurred in either group. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a pharmacy-driven BLA reconciliation significantly increased ß-lactam preoperative use without negative safety outcomes.


Subject(s)
Drug Hypersensitivity , Pharmacy , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Drug Hypersensitivity/prevention & control , Humans , Lactams , Retrospective Studies , beta-Lactams/adverse effects
7.
Open Forum Infectious Diseases ; 7(Supplement_1):S264-S265, 2020.
Article in English | Oxford Academic | ID: covidwho-1010463
8.
Qualitative Inquiry ; : 1077800420960158, 2020.
Article | Sage | ID: covidwho-814473

ABSTRACT

As the COVID 19 pandemic spread globally, the experiences of loss were compounded by personal loss. Through this time of collective and individual grieving I set out to ?traverse? the experience and figure my ?perezhivanie? or lived emotional experience, through the materiality of mark making and entanglements with people, place, and art making. Art making framed by the ?massive and microscopic? reflective prompts provided the opportunity for interventions into the medicalized and clinical world of hospitals and COVID 19, enacting beauty within a time of global, local, and personal grieving.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL