A prospective evaluation of standard versus battery-powered sequential compression devices in postsurgical patients.

BACKGROUND: Sequential compression devices (SCDs) reduce deep venous thrombosis in postsurgical patients, but the use is hindered by poor compliance. METHODS: General and orthopedic surgery patients (n = 67) were randomized to standard- or battery-powered SCDs. Compliance was documented hourly. Nurses and patients were issued a survey to assess barriers to compliance and device satisfaction. RESULTS: Compliance with standard SCDs was 47% compared with 85% with battery-powered SCDs (P < .001). The most common barriers identified by nurses and patients were ambulation and transfers, which were mitigated with the battery-powered device. A majority (79%) of those issued a battery-powered device reported no major problems compared with only 14% of patients issued a standard device (P < .005). CONCLUSIONS: The dual venous thromboembolism prevention strategies of early mobilization and SCD utilization can be met with the appropriate equipment.

Identifying patients at high risk for venous thromboembolism requiring treatment after outpatient surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To identify independent predictors of 30-day venous thromboembolism (VTE) events requiring treatment after outpatient surgery. BACKGROUND: An increasing proportion of surgical procedures are performed in the outpatient setting. The incidence of VTE requiring treatment after outpatient surgery is unknown. METHODS: Prospective observational cohort study using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from 2005 to 2009. Adult patients who had outpatient surgery or surgery with subsequent 23-hour observation were included. The main outcome measure was 30-day VTE requiring treatment. Patients were randomly assigned to derivation (N = 173,501) or validation (N = 85,730) cohorts. Logistic regression examined independent risk factors for 30-day VTE. A weighted risk index was created and applied to the validation cohort. Stratified analyses examined 30-day VTE by risk level. RESULTS: Thirty-day incidence of VTE for the overall cohort was 0.15%. Independent risk factors included current pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 7.80, P = 0.044), active cancer (OR = 3.66, P = 0.005), age 41 to 59 years (OR = 1.72, P = 0.008), age 60 years or more (OR = 2.48, P < 0.001), body mass index 40 kg/m or higher (OR = 1.81, P = 0.015), operative time 120 minutes or more (OR = 1.69, P = 0.027), arthroscopic surgery (OR = 5.16, P < 0.001), saphenofemoral junction surgery (OR = 13.20, P < 0.001), and venous surgery not involving the great saphenous vein (OR = 15.61, P < 0.001). The weighted risk index identified a 20-fold variation in 30-day VTE between low (0.06%) and highest risk (1.18%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Thirty-day VTE risk after outpatient surgery can be quantified using a weighted risk index. The risk index identifies a high-risk subgroup of patients with 30-day VTE rates of 1.18%.

Nurse practitioners and physician assistants employed by general and subspecialty pediatricians.

OBJECTIVE: There is little nationally representative information describing the current manner in which nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) work in pediatric practices and their professional activities. To understand better the current NP and PA workforce in pediatric primary and subspecialty care, we conducted a national survey of pediatricians. METHODS: A survey study of a random national sample of 498 pediatric generalists and 1696 subspecialists in the United States was performed by using a structured questionnaire administered by mail. The survey focused on practice settings, employment, and scope of work of NPs and PAs. RESULTS: Response rates were 72% for generalists and 77% for subspecialists. More than one-half (55%) of generalists reported that they do not currently work with NPs or PAs, compared with only one-third of subspecialists who do not. Many generalists and subspecialists intend to increase the number of NPs and PAs in their practices in the next 5 years. More generalist and subspecialty practices work with NPs than with PAs. There was great variability between generalists and subspecialists and among different subspecialties in the proportions that worked with NPs and PAs. The scope of work of NPs and PAs also varied between generalists and subspecialists. CONCLUSIONS: Planned increases in the number of NPs hired and expansion of their scope of work might put subspecialists and general pediatricians in competition with regard to recruitment and hiring of a limited pool of new pediatric NPs. Similar issues might arise with PAs.

Private practice rates among pediatric subspecialists.

OBJECTIVE: Historically, most pediatric subspecialists have conducted their clinical work in academic health centers. However, increases in the absolute numbers of pediatric subspecialists in past decades, combined with greater concentrations of children in urban and suburban settings, might result in more opportunities for pediatric subspecialists to enter private practice. Our goal was to assess the proportions of subspecialists in private practice. METHODS: We surveyed a stratified, random, national sample of 1696 subspecialists from 5 subspecialties and assessed the ownership of their current clinical practice settings. RESULTS: The response rate was 77%. Two-thirds of respondents (65% [n = 705]) reported that they work in academic hospitals or outpatient clinics. Compared with other subspecialists, greater proportions of neonatologists (38% [n = 92]) and critical care physicians (19% [n = 44]) reported that they work in community hospitals. Larger proportions of cardiologists (27% [n = 58]) and gastroenterologists (24% [n = 47]) reported that they work in private outpatient practices. CONCLUSIONS: There were significant proportions of pediatric subspecialists in private practice in most of the 5 subspecialties studied. Ensuring children's access to pediatric subspecialists likely will require a robust workforce in both academic and private clinical settings. Ongoing studies of the career trajectories of pediatric subspecialists with respect to their venues of practice will be essential for future workforce planning.

The effect of increased hip flexion using stirrups on lower-extremity venous flow: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Patient positioning during surgeries for colorectal cancer may represent an unrecognized risk factor for deep venous thrombosis. METHODS: Twelve healthy control patients were positioned supine with knee flexion at 90°. Duplex ultrasound examined common femoral vein (CFV) and proximal femoral vein diameter, peak systolic velocity, and volume flow with hip flexion at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90°. Data were analyzed using the paired t test. RESULTS: In the CFV, hip flexion to 90° was associated with a significant increase in mean volume flow when compared with hip flexion at 0° (.59 vs .36 L/min; P = .05) and 30° (.59 vs .35 L/min; P = .038). In both the CFV and proximal femoral vein, increased hip flexion was associated with significantly reduced vessel diameter and increased peak systolic velocity. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative positioning of the lower extremities represents a modifiable risk factor for deep venous thrombosis. When stirrups are used, hip flexion of 90° maximizes venous drainage from the legs.

Pediatric physician assistants: distribution and scope of practice.

BACKGROUND: Physician assistants (PAs) are licensed to practice with physician supervision. PAs do not specialize or subspecialize as part of their formal standard training; consequently, their license is not limited to a specific specialty. As such, PAs can, and do, change their practice settings at will. Some researchers have projected plans for the future use of the pediatric PA workforce. However, the information on which those projections have been based is limited. OBJECTIVE: To provide information regarding the current status of pediatric PAs and to inform future workforce deliberations, we studied their current distribution and scope of practice. METHODS: Data from the American Association of Physician Assistants and the US Census Bureau were used to map the per-capita national distribution of pediatric PAs. We conducted a mail survey of a random sample of 350 PAs working in general pediatrics and 300 working in pediatric subspecialties. RESULTS: Most states have <50 pediatric PAs, and there is significant variation in their distribution across the nation. The overall survey response rate was 83.5%; 82% (n = 359) were female. More than half of the respondents (57% [n = 247]) reported that they currently are working in pediatric primary care, mostly in private-practice settings. CONCLUSIONS: PAs can, and do, play an important role in the care of children in the United States. However, the impact of that role is limited by the relative scarcity of PAs currently engaged in pediatric practice.