Search results for: Linda Van Den Berg

Authors: Benjamin J. Kuo, Silvia D. Vaca, Joao Ricardo Nickenig Vissoci, Catherine A. Staton, Linda Xu, Michael Muhumuza, Hussein Ssenyonjo, John Mukasa, Joel Kiryabwire, Lydia Nanjula, Christine Muhumuza, Henry E. Rice, Gerald A. Grant, Michael M. Haglund

Abstract:

Background: Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is disproportionally concentrated in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with the odds of dying from TBI in Uganda more than 4 times higher than in high income countries (HICs). The disparities in the injury incidence and outcome between LMICs and resource-rich settings have led to increased health outcomes research for TBIs and their associated risk factors in LMICs. While there have been increasing TBI studies in LMICs over the last decade, there is still a need for more robust prospective registries. In Uganda, a trauma registry implemented in 2004 at the Mulago National Referral Hospital (MNRH) showed that RTI is the major contributor (60%) of overall mortality in the casualty department. While the prior registry provides information on injury incidence and burden, it’s limited in scope and doesn’t follow patients longitudinally throughout their hospital stay nor does it focus specifically on TBIs. And although these retrospective analyses are helpful for benchmarking TBI outcomes, they make it hard to identify specific quality improvement initiatives. The relationship among epidemiology, patient risk factors, clinical care, and TBI outcomes are still relatively unknown at MNRH. Objective: The objectives of this study are to describe the processes of care and determine risk factors predictive of poor outcomes for TBI patients presenting to a single tertiary hospital in Uganda. Methods: Prospective data were collected for 563 TBI patients presenting to a tertiary hospital in Kampala from 1 June – 30 November 2016. Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) was used to systematically collect variables spanning 8 categories. Univariate and multivariate analysis were conducted to determine significant predictors of mortality. Results: 563 TBI patients were enrolled from 1 June – 30 November 2016. 102 patients (18%) received surgery, 29 patients (5.1%) intended for surgery failed to receive it, and 251 patients (45%) received non-operative management. Overall mortality was 9.6%, which ranged from 4.7% for mild and moderate TBI to 55% for severe TBI patients with GCS 3-5. Within each TBI severity category, mortality differed by management pathway. Variables predictive of mortality were TBI severity, more than one intracranial bleed, failure to receive surgery, high dependency unit admission, ventilator support outside of surgery, and hospital arrival delayed by more than 4 hours. Conclusions: The overall mortality rate of 9.6% in Uganda for TBI is high, and likely underestimates the true TBI mortality. Furthermore, the wide-ranging mortality (3-82%), high ICU fatality, and negative impact of care delays suggest shortcomings with the current triaging practices. Lack of surgical intervention when needed was highly predictive of mortality in TBI patients. Further research into the determinants of surgical interventions, quality of step-up care, and prolonged care delays are needed to better understand the complex interplay of variables that affect patient outcome. These insights guide the development of future interventions and resource allocation to improve patient outcomes.

Keywords: care continuum, global neurosurgery, Kampala Uganda, LMIC, Mulago, prospective registry, traumatic brain injury

Procedia PDF Downloads 206

Authors: Liane J. Ioannou, Jonathan Serpell, Cino Bendinelli, David Walters, Jenny Gough, Dean Lisewski, Win Meyer-Rochow, Julie Miller, Duncan Topliss, Bill Fleming, Stephen Farrell, Andrew Kiu, James Kollias, Mark Sywak, Adam Aniss, Linda Fenton, Danielle Ghusn, Simon Harper, Aleksandra Popadich, Kate Stringer, David Watters, Susannah Ahern

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: There are significant variations in the management, treatment and outcomes of thyroid cancer, particularly in the role of: diagnostic investigation and pre-treatment scanning; optimal extent of surgery (total or hemi-thyroidectomy); use of active surveillance for small low-risk cancers; central lymph node dissections (therapeutic or prophylactic); outcomes following surgery (e.g. recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, hypocalcaemia, hypoparathyroidism); post-surgical hormone, calcium and vitamin D therapy; and provision and dosage of radioactive iodine treatment. A proven strategy to reduce variations in the outcome and to improve survival is to measure and compare it using high-quality clinical registry data. Clinical registries provide the most effective means of collecting high-quality data and are a tool for quality improvement. Where they have been introduced at a state or national level, registries have become one of the most clinically valued tools for quality improvement. To benchmark clinical care, clinical quality registries require systematic measurement at predefined intervals and the capacity to report back information to participating clinical units. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a core set clinical indicators that enable measurement and reporting of quality of care for patients with thyroid cancer. We hypothesise that measuring clinical quality indicators, developed to identify differences in quality of care across sites, will reduce variation and improve patient outcomes and survival, thereby lessening costs and healthcare burden to the Australian community. METHOD: Preparatory work and scoping was conducted to identify existing high quality, clinical guidelines and best practice for thyroid cancer both nationally and internationally, as well as relevant literature. A bi-national panel was invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. Panelists were asked to rate each proposed indicator on a Likert scale of 1–9 in a three-round iterative process. RESULTS: A total of 236 potential quality indicators were identified. One hundred and ninety-two indicators were removed to reflect the data capture by the Australian and New Zealand Thyroid Cancer Registry (ANZTCR) (from diagnosis to 90-days post-surgery). The remaining 44 indicators were presented to the panelists for voting. A further 21 indicators were later added by the panelists bringing the total potential quality indicators to 65. Of these, 21 were considered the most important and feasible indicators to measure quality of care in thyroid cancer, of which 12 were recommended for inclusion in the final set. The consensus indicator set spans the spectrum of care, including: preoperative; surgery; surgical complications; staging and post-surgical treatment planning; and post-surgical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a core set of quality indicators to measure quality of care in thyroid cancer. This indicator set can be applied as a tool for internal quality improvement, comparative quality reporting, public reporting and research. Inclusion of these quality indicators into monitoring databases such as clinical quality registries will enable opportunities for benchmarking and feedback on best practice care to clinicians involved in the management of thyroid cancer.

Keywords: clinical registry, Delphi survey, quality indicators, quality of care

Procedia PDF Downloads 151