RESUMO
PURPOSE: Evaluation by a gynecologic oncologist (GO) is associated with improved clinical outcomes for patients with gynecologic cancers, yet little is known about health care factors that influence patients' referrals to GO. METHODS: Medical records of 50 consecutive new patients seen in GO clinics at each of six referral centers across the United States were reviewed. Patient and disease characteristics were collected along with referral indication, evaluation and referral dates, diagnostic procedures, provider specialties, and zone improvement plan (ZIP) code of up to three referring providers per patient. The primary outcome was interval between first evaluation and referral. Univariate associations were evaluated with Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and multivariable associations with negative binomial regression models. Secondary outcome was prolonged time to GO referral, defined as greater than the 75th percentile. Logistic regression was used for multivariable modeling. RESULTS: Three hundred patient records were analyzed. The median time from first health care encounter to referral was 15 days (IQR, 5-43). The mean distance from residence to GO was 39.8 miles (standard deviation, 53.8). Seventy-one percent of GO referrals were initiated by obstetrician-gynecologists, 9% by family physicians, and 6% internists. Presentation-to-referral interval was 76% shorter for patients evaluated by an emergency medicine clinician (exp(Beta), 0.24; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.53; P < .001). Public insurance was associated with 1.47 times longer time to referral compared with private insurance (exp(Beta), 1.47; 95% CI, 1.05 to 2.04; P = .001). Residents of nonmetropolitan ZIP codes were less likely to have prolonged time to referral (odds ratio [OR], 0.288; P = .017). Distance from residence to GO (per 10 miles) increased the likelihood of prolonged time to referral (OR, 1.10; P = .010). CONCLUSION: Interventions are needed to improve recognition and referral of patients for gynecologic oncology evaluation. Community outreach and engagement with obstetrician-gynecologists should be prioritized to improve times to referral.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Current literature is limited with regard to standardized postoperative surgical site hygiene after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). With little guidance from the literature, the timing of permissible postoperative cleaning is a decision made by the individual surgeon using anecdotal evidence. A standardized wound care regimen is of particular interest to minimize the risk of infection. METHODS: To examine what species of bacteria recolonize the surgical site postoperatively, a randomized controlled trial was performed of 16 TKA patients who were allowed to shower at 2 days postoperatively and of 16 patients who were asked to wait until 2 weeks postoperatively before showering after TKA. Culture swabs of skin adjacent to the incision were performed preoperatively, just after incision closure, at dressing removal, and at 2 weeks postoperatively. Bacteria were speciated and compared between groups. A swab of the contralateral knee was performed at 2 weeks as a control. A survey of patient's preference regarding early and late showering was also carried out. RESULTS: No difference was found between the groups in rate of colonization or bacterial type, and no patients developed infection. Patients overwhelmingly preferred early showering rather than late (P = .28-.99). CONCLUSION: There is no difference in surgical site bacterial recolonization between early and delayed showering after primary TKA.
