The impact of cardiac complications on outcome in the SAH population.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of cardiac complications (CdCs) on outcomes in patients with acute subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-one adult aneurysmal SAH patients with a fisher grade >1 and/or a Hunt and Hess grade >2 were recruited for this study. CdCs were defined as electrocardiogram (ECG) changes, myocardial necrosis, arrythmias, or pulmonary edema. Outcomes were assessed at 3, 6 and 12 months by telephone interview using the Modified Rankin Scale (MRS), Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), Barthel Index and Medical Outcome study Short Form-36 (SF-36). RESULTS: The CdCs occurred in 33% of patients. The most common CdCs were arrythmias and pulmonary edema (30%). There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups. At 3 months there was a significant difference in the Barthel (P = 0.007) and the SF-36 (P = 0.014) with trends in the GOS (P = 0.049) and the MRS (P = 0.063). At 6 months a significant difference remained in the SF-36 (P = 0.028) and a trend in the Barthel (P = 0.069). CONCLUSION: Results show that CdCs may negatively impact outcomes in SAH patients up to 6 months following hemorrhage.

Care activities and outcomes of patients cared for by acute care nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and resident physicians: a comparison.

BACKGROUND: Little information is available on the practice of acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants in acute care settings. OBJECTIVES: To compare the care activities performed by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and the outcomes of their patients with the care activities and patients' outcomes of resident physicians. METHODS: Sixteen acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and a matched group of resident physicians were studied during a 14-month period. Data on the subjects' daily activities and on patients' outcomes were collected 4 times. RESULTS: Compared with the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants, residents cared for patients who were older and sicker, cared for more patients, worked more hours, took a more active role in patient rounds, and spent more time in lectures and conferences. The nurse practitioners and physician assistants were more likely than the residents to discuss patients with bedside nurses and to interact with patients' families. They also spent more time in research and administrative activities. Few of the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants performed invasive procedures on a regular basis. Outcomes were assessed for 187 patients treated by the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and for 202 patients treated by the resident physicians. Outcomes did not differ markedly for patients treated by either group. The acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants were more likely than the residents to include patients' social history in the admission notes. CONCLUSIONS: The tasks and activities performed by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants are similar to those performed by resident physicians. However, residents treat patients who are sicker and older than those treated by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Patients' outcomes are similar for both groups of subjects.

Comparison of toxicity and survival following intraperitoneal recombinant interleukin-2 for persistent ovarian cancer after platinum: twenty-four-hour versus 7-day infusion.

PURPOSE: To compare the toxicity, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy seen in ovarian cancer patients treated with escalating doses of intraperitoneal (I.P.) interleukin-2 (IL-2) by two different infusion schedules. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-five patients were sequentially entered onto a phase I/II study in groups of four at fixed dosage tiers of 6 x 10(4), 6 x 10(5), 6 x 10(6), and 3 x 10(7) IU/m2/d in either of two schedules: (A) intermittent weekly infusions of 24 hours' duration; or (B) alternating continuous 7-day infusions followed by 7-day intervals without therapy. Eligibility criteria included > or = six courses of prior platinum-based chemotherapy and laparotomy-confirmed persistent or recurrent ovarian cancer. RESULTS: Forty-one eligible patients received I.P. IL-2 and were assessable for toxicity, but six patients were not assessable for response, which left 35 patients assessable for response. Significant locoregional dose-limiting toxicity was seen with the 7-day infusions (including bowel perforation), with 600,000 IU/m2 as the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), but catheter infection was the only significant complication seen with the 24-hour infusions, for which an MTD was not established. Among 35 assessable patients, there were six laparotomy-confirmed complete responses (CRs) and three partial responses, for an overall response rate of 25.7% (nine of 35). The median survival time of the cohort was 13.7 months and the overall 5-year survival probability was 13.9%. For the nine patients who demonstrated responses (six on the 24-hour infusion and three on the 7-day infusion), the median survival time has not been reached (range, 27 to 90+ months). CONCLUSION: I.P. IL-2 is better tolerated as a weekly infusion as compared with a 7-day infusion and demonstrates evidence of possible long-term efficacy in a modest number of patients. A randomized trial is indicated to determine if the prolonged survival seen in this study is a due to I.P. IL-2 therapy or other factors that cannot be controlled for in a single-arm study.

Credentialing and privileging: insight into the process for acute-care nurse practitioners.

Acute-care nurse practitioners must be knowledgeable of the mechanisms whereby their scope of practice is defined and regulated, and through which professional competence is ensured. The mechanisms whereby hospitals determine scope and practice parameters is through credentialing and the delineation of clinical privileges. This article supplies background for the influences to the credentialing and privileging process and provides insight into how the process is conducted. The potential future trend of economic credentialing is discussed briefly. Acute-care nurse practitioners are encouraged to negotiate for delineation of clinical privileges that are consistent with their professional and legal scope of practice, educational and individual capabilities, and the safe delivery of quality patient care. It is important that the process not be misused to erect barriers to practice, resulting in underserving of patient and organizational needs.

Current questions with regard to acute care nurse practitioner preparation and role implementation.

The role of the acute care nurse practitioner is being implemented in acute and tertiary care settings. As the role evolves, questions arise. Some of these questions relate to: 1) whether a need for the role has been clearly established; 2) whether the scope of acute care nurse practitioner practice has been identified distinctly; 3) the adequacy of educational preparation; 4) certification versus licensure; and 5) the nature of the relation between this role and other forms of advanced practice nursing. In this article, the authors identify and discuss some of these questions, provide information regarding current status, and postulate further potential resolutions.

Acute care nurse practitioner curriculum: content and development process.

Curriculum development for preparation of acute care nurse practitioners requires a comprehensive process. To develop a program for their preparation at a large university, the faculty examined needs of the target patient population and care delivery system; scope of acute care nurse practitioner practice; current guidelines for the education of primary care nurse practitioners; evolving guidelines for the didactic and clinical education of acute care nurse practitioners; educational requirements of governing or licensing and certifying bodies; and placement of this new role within the existing healthcare team structure. A curriculum was then developed using a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach.