Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Journal of Clinical Oncology ; 40(28 Supplement):338, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2098616

ABSTRACT

Background: OP-35 is a publicly reported quality metric aimed at reducing preventable emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations in patients with cancer on chemotherapy. During the COVID- 19 surge, one academic medical center opened the Respiratory Emergent Evaluation Service (REES) Unit, an urgent care clinic for patients with cancer and symptoms of COVID-19. In addition to preventing potential COVID-19 exposures in the clinic, this oncology-staffed urgent care evaluated patients who may have otherwise presented to the ED. We investigated the association between the REES urgent care clinic and patient ED evaluations for OP-35 diagnoses. Method(s): This single center retrospective analysis included patients with cancer receiving infusion and oral chemotherapy who presented to the ED within 30 days of treatment. ED visits occurred between 1/2019-12/2021, including when the REES unit was open (3/2020-6/2021). Preventable ED visits were defined as having one of ten primary diagnoses, which have been identified by OP-35. Of these, COVID-related diagnoses included fever, pneumonia, sepsis, neutropenia and diarrhea. Interrupted time series analyses were utilized to investigate the association between the REES unit opening and preventable ED visits. Result(s): 3,107 patients on chemotherapy were assessed in the ED from 1/2019-12/2021. Per week, there were 19.9 ED visits, 39.7% of which were for OP-35 diagnoses. When the REES unit opened, there was a 30% (95% CI -53% to -7%) reduction in preventable ED visits, corresponding to 2.62 (95% CI -4.61 to -0.63) fewer preventable ED evaluations per week. The primary driver of this reduction were presentations for COVID- related diagnoses, as there were 38% (95% CI -76% to -0.3%) fewer preventable ED visits weekly. During this period, there were approximately 6.9 patient visits per week to the REES unit. Conclusion(s): The introduction of an oncology urgent care clinic focusing on patients with symptoms of COVID-19 was associated with a reduction in potentially preventable ED visits. This analysis demonstrates the potential value of oncology urgent care clinics in reducing ED overcrowding and decreasing OP-35 related evaluations, which has patient experience, infection exposure and financial implications.

2.
Open Forum Infectious Diseases ; 8(SUPPL 1):S386-S387, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1746428

ABSTRACT

Background. Based on national recommendations,1 Beth Israel Lahey Health (BILH) in Eastern Massachusetts (MA) prioritized vulnerable communities in our distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. We hypothesized that creating prioritized access to appointments for patients in these communities would increase the likelihood vaccination. Methods. The BILH health system sent vaccine invitations first to patients of two clinics in vulnerable neighborhoods in Boston (Wave 1), followed by other patients from vulnerable communities (Wave 2) up to 1 day later, and then by all other patients (Wave 3) after up to 1 more day later. To identify whether early access/prioritization increased the likelihood of receipt of vaccine at any site or a vaccine at a BILH clinic, we compared patients in Wave 1 in a single community with high cumulative incidence of COVID-19 (Dorchester) to patients in Wave 2 during a period of limited vaccine access, 1/27/21-2/24/21. Each wave was modeled using logistic regression, adjusted for language and race. By taking the difference between these two differences, we are left with the impact of early vaccination invitation in Wave 1 for a subset of our most vulnerable patients (termed difference-in-differences;Stata SE 16.0). Results. In our study of Waves 1 and 2, we offered vaccinations to 24,410 patients. Of those, 6,712 (27.5%) scheduled the vaccine at BILH (Table 1). Patients in Wave 1 were much more likely to be vaccinated at BILH than patients in Wave 2. Patients offered the vaccine in Wave 1 and living in Dorchester were 1.7 percentage points more likely to be vaccinated at all (p=0.445) and 9.4 percentage points more likely to be vaccinated at BILH than another site in MA (p-value = 0.001), relative to patients living outside of Dorchester and offered the vaccine in Wave 2 (Table 2). The coefficient of interest is on Wave1∗Dorchester, 0.094. This indicates that residents of Dorchester who were offered the vaccine in Wave 1 were 9.4 percentage points more likely to receive the vaccine at BILH, given that they were vaccinated, relative to patients living outside of Dorchester and offered the vaccine in Wave 2. Conclusion. Patients residing in an urban community given prioritized access to vaccination had a higher likelihood of vaccination at our health system, given that they were vaccinated, than patients in other urban communities without prioritized access. We provide an example of a successful effort to move towards equity in access to COVID-19- vaccines, in contrast to larger national trends.2,3 Health systems can use a prioritization approach to improve vaccination equity.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL