JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association
-
To assess the impact of safety belt use on the extent of injuries sustained in motor-vehicle accidents and the incurred health care costs, 1364 patients were prospectively evaluated at four Chicago-area hospitals. Of these, 791 (58%) were wearing a safety belt whereas 573 (42%) were not. The mean injury severity score for safety belt wearers was 1.8 +/- 0.07 vs 4.51 +/- 0.31 in those not wearing a safety belt. ⋯ Restrained occupants incurred mean charges of $534 +/- $67 compared with $1583 +/- $201 in unrestrained occupants. Thus, safety belt wearers had a 60.1% reduction in severity of injury, a 64.6% decrease in hospital admissions, and a 66.3% decline in hospital charges. Our findings demonstrate the significant societal burden of nonuse of safety belts in terms of morbidity and the costs of medical care.
-
We created a microcomputer-based system that uses characteristics of the patient at admission to predict death within 30 days of hospital admission for Medicare patients with stroke, pneumonia, myocardial infarction, and congestive heart failure. These conditions account for 13% of discharges and 31% of 30-day mortality for Medicare patients over 64 years of age. ⋯ The cross-validated R2 for predictions is 0.14 to 0.25, which is better than the values for other systems for which we have data. Risk-adjusted predicted group mortality rates may be useful in interpreting information on unadjusted mortality rates, and patient-specific predictions may be useful in identifying unexpected deaths for clinical review.
-
This study uses national Medicare data as well as data that were abstracted to calibrate the Medicare Mortality Predictor System to assess the usefulness of a risk adjustment system in interpreting hospital mortality rates. The majority of variation in annual hospital death rates for the four conditions studied (stroke, pneumonia, myocardial infarction, and congestive heart failure) is chance variability that results from the relatively small numbers of patients treated in most hospitals in a year. ⋯ Risk adjustment methods do not show whether the unexplained difference in mortality rates results from differences in effectiveness of care or unmeasured differences in patient risk at the time of admission. Risk-adjusted mortality rates, therefore, should be supplemented by review of the actual care rendered before conclusions are drawn regarding effectiveness of care.
-
To evaluate the effects of reorganizing physician resources in a medical intensive care unit (MICU), we studied the impact of these changes in patients with septic shock. Patients were compared during two consecutive 12-month periods: (1) an interval in which faculty without critical care medicine (CCM) training supervised the MICU (before CCM, n = 100) and (2) following staffing with physicians formally trained in CCM (after CCM, n = 112). Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation scores were utilized to compare severity of illness and were similar for each group (29 +/- 11 before CCM vs 28 +/- 10 after CCM). ⋯ There was no significant difference in the frequency of use of mechanical ventilation (83% vs 87%), although pulmonary artery catheters (48% vs 64%) and arterial catheters (24% vs 73%) were employed more frequently after CCM. The number of subspecialty consultations and MICU and hospital length of stay were similar for both intervals. We conclude that the implementation of dedicated staffing by CCM physicians in a university hospital MICU was associated with a favorable impact on patients with septic shock.