Mechanisms Associated with Clinical Improvement in Interventions That Address Health-Related Social Needs: A Mixed-Methods Analysis.
Population health management
Linking individuals to community resources in order to help meet health-related social needs, such as food, medications, or transportation, may improve clinical outcomes. However, little is known about the mechanisms whereby such linkage interventions might improve health. The authors conducted a mixed-methods analysis consisting of outcomes from a prospective cohort study of a linkage intervention and a qualitative analysis of case records from participants. The cohort study included intervention participants who first enrolled between December 2014 and March 2015. Participants were excluded if they could not complete the assessment because of illness or language. The authors examined changes in cost-related medication underuse (CRMU), transportation barriers, and food insecurity (FI). For the qualitative analysis, a random sample of 80 participants was selected for electronic health record review - 40 cases who showed clinical improvement (responders) and 40 cases who did not (nonresponders). Themes were extracted by 3 reviewers guided by the immersion/crystallization approach. For the cohort study, 141 individuals were included; 138 (97.9%) completed follow-up. Comparing baseline to follow-up, there were significant reductions in the prevalence of CRMU (from 44.2% to 39.1%, P=.003) and transportation barriers (from 46.3% to 30.2%, P=.001), but not FI (from 40.4% to 38.2%, P=.73). For the qualitative study, emergent themes that helped differentiate responders and nonresponders included acuity of need, resource availability/access, and adequacy of the resource utilized. CRMU and transportation barriers may be important mechanisms by which linkage interventions improve health-related social needs. Patient-centered themes can help guide intervention improvements.
View details for PubMedID 30562141
Interactive home telehealth and burns: A pilot study
2017; 43 (6): 1318?21
The objective of this study is to review our experience incorporating Interactive Home Telehealth (IHT) visits into follow-up burn care.A retrospective review of all burn patients participating in IHT encounters over the course of 15 months was performed. Connections were established through secure video conferencing and call-routing software. Patients connected with a personal computer or tablet and providers connected with a desktop computer with a high-definition web camera. In some cases, high-definition digital images were emailed to the provider prior to the virtual consultation. For each patient, the following was collected: (1) patient and injury demographics (diagnosis, prognosis, and clinical management), (2) total number of encounters, (3) service for each encounter (burn, psychiatry, and rehabilitation), (4) length of visit, including travel distance and time saved and, (5) complications, including re-admissions and connectivity issues.52 virtual encounters were performed with 31 patients during the first year of the pilot project from March 2015 to June 2016. Mean age of the participant was 44 years (range 18-83 years). Mean total burn surface area of the participant was 12% (range 1-80%). Average roundtrip travel distance saved was 188 miles (range 4-822 miles). Average round trip travel time saved was 201min (range 20-564min). There were no unplanned re-admissions and no complications. Five connectivity issues were reported, none of which prevented completion of the visit.Interactive Home Telehealth is a safe and feasible modality for delivering follow-up care to burn patients. Burn care providers benefit from the potential to improve outpatient clinic utilization. Patients benefit from improved access to multiple members of their specialized burn care team, as well as cost-reductions for patient travel expenses. Future studies are needed to ensure patient and provider satisfaction and to further validate the significance, cost-effectiveness and safety.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.burns.2016.11.013
View details for Web of Science ID 000410623300022
View details for PubMedID 28641914
The Use of CO2 Fractional Photothermolysis for the Treatment of Burn Scars
JOURNAL OF BURN CARE & RESEARCH
2016; 37 (2): 106?14
A recent advancement in the treatment of burn scars has been the use of the carbon dioxide (CO2) laser to perform fractional photothermolysis. In this analysis, we describe our results and patient-reported outcomes with the use of fractional CO2 laser for the treatment of burn-related scarring. We performed a retrospective study of all patients who underwent CO2 laser procedures for treatment of symptomatic burn scars and skin grafts at one accredited regional burn center. Burn injury and laser treatment demographics, as well as complications, are reported. A questionnaire was administered to all patients and included patient-reported outcome measures aimed at understanding the patient experience and their subjective response to treatment. A total of 387 CO2 laser procedures were performed on 131 patients for the treatment of symptomatic burn scars and skin grafts between October 1, 2011, and May 1, 2014 (average, 2.95 procedures/patient; range, 1-11). Average time between injury and first laser was 597.35 days (range, 60-13,475). Average time between laser treatments (when multiple) was 117.73 days (range, 22-514). There were no infections requiring treatment with oral antibiotics. Overall patient satisfaction with laser therapy was 96.7%. Patients reported reductions in neuropathic pain, tightness (contracture), and pruritus (54.0, 50.6, and 49.0%, respectively). Fractional photothermolysis utilizing the CO2 laser is a safe and effective modality for the treatment of symptomatic burn scars, donor sites, and skin grafts. Patient satisfaction with this procedure is high, and complications are low. Significant improvements in scar appearance, pliability, tightness, neuropathic pain, and pruritus were commonly reported.
View details for DOI 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000285
View details for Web of Science ID 000369865400004
View details for PubMedID 26536539