ABSTRACT
Background: Prospective audit and feedback (PAF) is an established practice in critical care settings but not in surgical populations. We pilot-tested a structured face-to-face PAF program for our acute-care surgery (ACS) service. Methods: This was a mixed-methods study. For the quantitative analysis, the structured PAF period was from August 1, 2017, to April 30, 2019. The ad hoc PAF period was from May 1, 2019, to January 31, 2021. Interrupted time-series segmented negative binomial regression analysis was used to evaluate change in antimicrobial usage measured in days of therapy per 1,000 patient days for all systemic and targeted antimicrobials. Secondary outcomes included C. difficile infections, length of stay and readmission within 30 days. Each secondary outcome was analyzed using a logistic regression or negative binomial regression model. For the qualitative analyses, all ACS surgeons and trainees from November 23, 2015, to April 30, 2019, were invited to participate in an email-based anonymous survey developed using implementation science principles. Responses were measured using counts. Results: In total, 776 ACS patients were included in the structured PAF period and 783 patients were included in the in ad hoc PAF period. No significant changes in level or trend for antimicrobial usage were detected for all and targeted antimicrobials. Similarly, no significant differences were detected for secondary outcomes. The survey response rate was 25% (n = 10). Moreover, 50% agreed that PAF provided them with skills to use antimicrobials more judiciously, and 80% agreed that PAF improved the quality of antimicrobial treatment for their patients. Conclusion: Structured PAF showed clinical outcomes similar to ad hoc PAF. Structured PAF was well received and was perceived as beneficial by surgical staff.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Asplenic patients in general have poor knowledge about their condition. Patients are increasingly turning to the Internet for their health care information, therefore this is a resource that many asplenic patients will use. The aim of our study was to determine the quality of information on the Internet for asplenic patients. METHODS: We identified websites by entering "splenectomy OR spleen removal" into 3 Internet search engines on July 28, 2008. The top 50 English-language websites from each search engine were included in our analysis. We evaluated the websites with our own 21-point content scale as well as 4 commonly used quality-assessment tools. All websites were analyzed independently by 2 reviewers. Correlations were made between the quality assessment instruments, content, readability and target audience. RESULTS: We included 89 websites in the study. The mean content score percentage for all websites was 49% (95% confidence interval 44%-54%). The long-term risk of infection was mentioned in 84% of websites, and the need for vaccination was mentioned in 79%. The mean quality assessment tool score was 61%, and the mean reading grade level was 11. CONCLUSION: Whereas websites on average did not cover most of the information that asplenic patients should receive, the long-term risk of serious infection and the need for vaccination was consistently mentioned. Websites were inconsistent with respect to adhering to standards advocated by the quality assessment instruments we used, and the mean reading grade level was far above what is recommended for patient literature.
