Developing measures for pediatric quality: methods and experiences of the CHIPRA pediatric quality measures program grantees.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring quality is an important way of understanding how the health care system is serving children and families. The Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA) Pediatric Quality Measures Program (PQMP) funded efforts to develop and enhance measures to assess care for children and adolescents. We describe the processes used by the PQMP grantees to develop measures to assess the health care of children and adolescents in Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program. METHODS: Key steps in the measures development process include identifying concepts, reviewing and synthesizing evidence, prioritizing concepts, defining how measures should be calculated, and measure testing. Stakeholder engagement throughout the process is critical. Case studies illustrate how PQMP grantees adapted the process to respond to the nature of measures they were charged to develop and overcome challenges encountered. RESULTS: PQMP grantees used varied approaches to measures development but faced common challenges, some specific to the field of pediatrics and some general to all quality measures. Major challenges included the limited evidence base, data systems difficult or unsuited for measures reporting, and conflicting stakeholder priorities. CONCLUSIONS: As part of the PQMP, grantees were able to explore innovative methods to overcome measurement challenges, including new approaches to building the evidence base and stakeholder consensus, integration of alternative data sources, and implementation of new testing methods. As a result, the PQMP has developed new quality measures for pediatric care while also building an infrastructure, expertise, and enhanced methods for measures development that promise to provide more relevant and meaningful tools for improving the quality of children's health care.

The role of patient-to-patient transmission in the acquisition of imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa colonization in the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (IRPA) is an emerging problem. The causal role of antibiotic selective pressure versus patient-to-patient transmission has not been assessed using a large cohort. METHODS: Patients who were admitted to the medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs) at the University of Maryland Medical Center from 2001 through 2006 had multiple perianal culture samples collected. Using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), the number of patients who acquired IRPA as a result of patient-to-patient transmission was determined. We also analyzed a subset of patients who had a previous surveillance culture that grew an imipenem-susceptible P. aeruginosa (ISPA) and a subsequent culture that grew IRPA. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 7071 patients. Three hundred patients were colonized with IRPA. 151 patients had positive culture findings at ICU admission, and 149 patients acquired an IRPA. Among the patients who acquired IRPA, 46 (31%) had a PFGE pattern similar to that for another isolate, and 38 (26%) were found to be colonized with an ISPA on the basis of earlier culture results. Of the 38-patient subset, 28 (74%) had identical PFGE patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed that, of those cases of IRPA acquisition, 46 (31%) were defined as cases of patient-to-patient transmission, and 28 (19%) were cases of acquisition by the patients' endogenous flora.

Hematoma-directed ultrasound-guided (HUG) breast lumpectomy.

BACKGROUND: Needle localization breast biopsy (NLBB) is presently the primary means of localizing non-palpable lesions. Disadvantages of NLBB include vasovagal episodes, patient discomfort, and miss rates. Because hematomas naturally fill the cavity after vacuum-assisted breast biopsies (VABB), we hypothesized that ultrasound (US) could be used to find and accurately excise the actual biopsy site of non-palpable breast lesions without a needle. METHODS: This is a retrospective study from January 2000 to July 2005. Electronic chart review identified patients with non-palpable breast lesions detected by means of mammogram who then underwent lumpectomy via NLBB or the hematoma-directed ultrasound-guided technique (HUG). HUG involved localizing the hematoma with a 7.5-MHz US probe and using the "line of sight" technique straight down toward the chest wall. A block of tissue encompassing the hematoma was then excised. RESULTS: Localization procedures were performed in 186 patients-63 (34%) via needle localization and 123 (66%) via HUG. The previous VABB site in 100% of patients was successfully excised using HUG, 65 of 123 (53%) were benign and 58 of 123 (47%) were malignant; margins were positive in 13 of these 58 (22%). NLBB was successful in 100% of patients, 44 of 63 (70%) were benign and 19 of 63 (30%) were malignant; margins were positive in 14 of these 19 (73%). Margin positivity was significantly higher for NLBB than HUG (P = 0.0001, Fisher Exact). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that HUG is more accurate in localizing non-palpable lesions than NLBB. By eliminating the additional procedure needed for NLBB, HUG may also be more time- and cost efficient. HUG makes VABB not only a less invasive diagnostic procedure, but also a localization procedure.