Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Endosc Int Open ; 12(5): E642-E648, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38707596

ABSTRACT

Background and study aims The Plan-Do-Study Act (PDSA) ramp is a framework that uses initial small changes to build consensus and momentum for subsequent, iterative process improvement. Our aim was to study its impact on endoscopy unit efficiency and throughput. Methods Following a granular time-and-motion analysis to evaluate baseline performance (phase 1) we instituted successive interventions and measured their impact on core efficiency metrics including procedure volume and turnover time (phases 2-3). Results We identified that inefficiency in turnover of anesthesia-supported endoscopy was the most crucial issue. Implementation of a pre-procedure anesthesia visit in phase 2 reduced turnover time by 15.5 minutes (95% confidence interval 3.9-27.1 minutes). Subsequent changes (phase 3) including front-loaded procedure scheduling and parallel in-room preparation resulted in an 18% increase in procedure volume. Conclusions The PDSA ramp model is an effective means of assessing operational processes, developing novel interventions, and building consensus to improve the real-world productivity in a resource-conscious manner.

2.
Biomedicines ; 11(12)2023 Nov 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38137345

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to describe worldwide gene therapy clinical trials aimed at treating ophthalmic disorders. Information regarding all worldwide clinical trials was collected through 15 different sources, including ClinicalTrials.gov. There were 159 gene therapy clinical trials on ophthalmic diseases up until 2022. Phase 1/2 trials had the highest frequency (50-32%), followed by phase 2 (33-21%); 107 trials (67%) were conducted in a single country, and 50 trials (31%) were multinational. Overall, the USA was the site of 113 (71%) single or multinational trials. Of the trials, 153 (96%) targeted retina and optic nerve disorders, 3 (2%) glaucoma, 2 (1%) uveitis, and 1 (1%) cornea; 104 trials (65%) employed gene augmentation using viral vectors, and the remaining employed other methods such as inhibitory RNA (18-11%) and cell-based gene therapy using encapsulated cell technology (18-11%). For gene augmentation trials, adeno-associated virus was used for transgene delivery in 87% of cases. The most common conditions targeted by gene augmentation included inherited retinal (74%) and age-related macular degeneration (wet, 14%; dry, 7%). Overall, a large number of gene therapy clinical trials have been conducted in the eye, and so far, one has led to regulatory approval.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 77(5): 672-679, 2023 09 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36881940

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We sought to compare the outcomes of patients treated with intravenous (IV)-only vs oral transitional antimicrobial therapy for infective endocarditis (IE) after implementing a new expected practice within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC DHS). METHODS: We conducted a multicentered, retrospective cohort study of adults with definite or possible IE treated with IV-only vs oral therapy at the 3 acute care public hospitals in the LAC DHS system between December 2018 and June 2022. The primary outcome was clinical success at 90 days, defined as being alive and without recurrence of bacteremia or treatment-emergent infectious complications. RESULTS: We identified 257 patients with IE treated with IV-only (n = 211) or oral transitional (n = 46) therapy who met study inclusion criteria. Study arms were similar for many demographics; however, the IV cohort was older, had more aortic valve involvement, were hemodialysis patients, and had central venous catheters present. In contrast, the oral cohort had a higher percentage of IE caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. There was no significant difference between the groups in clinical success at 90 days or last follow-up. There was no difference in recurrence of bacteremia or readmission rates. However, patients treated with oral therapy had significantly fewer adverse events. Multivariable regression adjustments did not find significant associations between any selected variables and clinical success across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate similar outcomes of real-world use of oral vs IV-only therapy for IE, in accord with prior randomized, controlled trials and meta-analyses.


Subject(s)
Bacteremia , Endocarditis, Bacterial , Endocarditis , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Staphylococcal Infections , Adult , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , Endocarditis, Bacterial/drug therapy , Endocarditis/drug therapy , Bacteremia/drug therapy , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Staphylococcal Infections/drug therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...