Wednesday, July 2, 2014

The newborn medical history has three key components:

1. Maternal and paternal medical and genetic history
2. Maternal past obstetric history
3. Current antepartum and intrapartum obstetric history


http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/media/files/3600/3600.1.10-Quintuplets.jpg 

The mother’s medical history includes chronic medical conditions, medications taken during pregnancy, unusual dietary habits, smoking history, occupational exposure to chemicals or infections of potential risk to the fetus, and any social history that might increase the risk for parenting problems and child abuse. Family illnesses and a history of congenital anomalies with genetic implications should be sought. The past obstetric history includes maternal age, gravidity, parity, blood type, and pregnancy outcomes. The current obstetric history includes the results of procedures during the current pregnancy such as ultrasound, amniocentesis, screening tests (rubella antibody, hepatitis B surface antigen, serum quadruple screen in the second trimester or first trimester ultrasound screening for nuchal translucency coupled with measurement in maternal serum of human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein

http://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/images/a/aa/World_neonatal_death.jpg World Neonatal Death

A to screen for genetic disorders, HIV [human immunodeficiency virus]), and antepartum tests of fetal well-being (eg, biophysical profiles, nonstress tests, or Doppler assessment of fetal blood flow patterns). Pregnancy-related maternal complications such as urinary tract infection, pregnancy-induced hypertension, eclampsia, gestational diabetes, vaginal bleeding, and preterm labor should be documented. Significant peripartum events include duration of ruptured membranes, maternal fever, fetal distress, meconium-stained amniotic fluid, type of delivery (vaginal or cesarean section), anesthesia and analgesia used, reason for operative or forceps delivery, infant status at birth, resuscitative measures, and Apgar scores

Monday, June 16, 2014

The newborn period is defined as the first 28 days of life. In practice, however, sick or very immature infants may require neonatal care for many months. There are three levels of newborn care. Level 1 refers to basic care of well newborns of 35 weeks’ gestation or more, neonatal resuscitation, and stabilization prior to transport. Level 2 refers to specialty neonatal care of premature infants greater than 1500 g or more than 32 weeks’ gestation. 
 
http://www.the-essential-infant-resource-for-moms.com/image-files/newborn-baby-care5.jpg

Level 3 is subspecialty care of higher complexity ranging from 3A to 3D based on newborn size and gestational age, availability of medical subspecialties, advanced imaging, pediatric ophthalmology, pediatric general surgery, cardiac surgery, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Level 3 care is often part of a perinatal center offering critical care and transport to the high-risk mother and fetus as well as the newborn infant. A level 4 center has additional capabilities to care for complex surgical conditions including cardiac surgery with bypass.

Friday, June 6, 2014

The primary responsibility of the Level 1 nursery is care of the well neonate—promoting mother-infant bonding, establishing feeding, and teaching the basics of newborn care. Staff must monitor infants for signs and symptoms of illness, including temperature instability, change in activity, refusal to feed, pallor, cyanosis, early or excessive jaundice, tachypnea, respiratory distress, delayed (beyond 24 hours) first stool or first void, and bilious vomiting. Several preventive measures are routine in the normal newborn nursery.

Prophylactic erythromycin ointment is applied to the eyes within 1 hour of birth to prevent gonococcal ophthalmia. Vitamin K (1 mg) is given intramuscularly or subcutaneously within 4 hours of birth to prevent hemorrhagic disease of the newborn.

 

All infants should receive hepatitis B vaccine. Both hepatitis B vaccine and hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) are administered if the mother is positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). If maternal HBsAg status is unknown, vaccine should be given before 12 hours of age, maternal blood should be tested for HBsAg, and HBIG should be given to the neonate before 7 days of age if the test is positive.

Cord blood is collected from all infants at birth and can be used for blood typing and Coombs testing if the mother is type O or Rh-negative to help assess the risk for development of jaundice.

Bedside glucose testing should be performed in infants at risk for hypoglycemia (infants of diabetic mothers, preterm, SGA, LGA, or stressed infants). Values below 45 mg/dL should be confirmed by laboratory blood glucose testing and treated. Hematocrit should be measured at age 3–6 hours in infants at risk for or those who have symptoms of polycythemia or anemia (see section on Hematologic Disorders).

State-sponsored newborn genetic screens (for inborn errors of metabolism such as phenylketonuria [PKU], galactosemia, sickle cell disease, hypothyroidism, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, and cystic fibrosis) are performed prior to discharge, after 24–48 hours of age if possible. In many states, a repeat test is required at 8–14 days of age because the PKU test may be falsely negative when obtained before 48 hours of age. Not all state-mandated screens include the same panel of diseases. The most recent additions include an expanded screen that tests for other inborn errors of metabolism such as fatty acid oxidation defects and amino or organic acid disorders and screening for severe combined immunodeficiency syndrome.

Infants should routinely be positioned supine to minimize the risk of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Prone positioning is contraindicated unless there are compelling clinical reasons for that position. Bed sharing with adults, tobacco exposure, overheating, soft items in the bed and prone positioning are associated with increased risk of SIDS.

Friday, May 30, 2014

The healthcare industry is in a period of transformation being driven by at least four converging factors: (1) the recognition of serious gaps in the safety and quality of care we provide (and receive), (2) the unsustainable increases in the cost of care as a percent of the national economy, (3) the aging of the population, and (4) the emerging role of healthcare information technology as a potential tool to improve care. These are impacting healthcare organizations as well as individual practitioners in numerous ways that can also be traced to expectations regarding transparency and increasing accountability for results. As depicted in Figure 1–1, the Triple Aim includes the simultaneous goals of better care (outcomes/experience) for individual patients, better health for the population, and lower cost overall. Practitioners and trainees must adapt to a new set of priorities that focus attention on new goals to extend our historic focus on the doctor/patient relationship and autonomous physician decision making. Instead, new imperatives are evidence-based medicine, advancing safety, and reducing unnecessary expense.

http://b-i.forbesimg.com/emsi/files/2013/10/healthcare-Charts-05b-05.png
The impact of healthcare quality improvement will increasingly influence clinical practice and the delivery of pediatric care in the future. This chapter provides a summary of some of the central elements of healthcare quality improvement and patient safety, and offers resources for the reader to obtain additional information and understanding about these topics.

To understand the external influences driving many of these changes, there are at least six key national organizations central to the transitions occurring

1. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (Department of Health and Human Services)—www.cms.govCenter for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) oversees the United States’ federally funded healthcare programs including Medicare, Medicaid, and other related programs. CMS and the Veterans Affairs Divisions together now provide funding for more than one trillion of the total $2.6 trillion the United States spends annually on healthcare expense. CMS is increasingly promoting payment mechanisms that withhold payment for the costs of preventable complications of care and giving incentives to providers for achieving better outcomes for their patients, primarily in its Medicare population. The agency has also enabled and advocated for greater transparency of results and makes available on its website comparative measures of performance for its Medicare population. CMS is also increasingly utilizing its standards under which hospitals and other healthcare provider organizations are licensed to provide care as tools to ensure greater compliance with these regulations. It has adopted a list of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) in 10 categories for which hospitals are no longer reimbursed. This list of HACs includes for 2013: foreign object retained after surgery, air embolism, blood incompatibility, stage III and IV pressure ulcers, falls and trauma, manifestations of poor glycemic control, catheter-associated urinary tract infection, iatrogenic pneumothorax, vascular catheter-associated infection, and surgical site infection or deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism after selected procedures. It is worth noting that CMS is able to generate comparative national data only for its Medicare population because it, unlike Medicaid, is a single federal program with a single financial database. Because the Medicaid program functions as 51 state/federal partnership arrangements, patient experience and costs are captured in 51 separate state-based program databases. This segmentation has limited the development of national measures for pediatric care in both inpatient and ambulatory settings. Similarly, while the reporting of HACs is uniform across the United States for Medicare patients, in the Medicaid population it varies by individual state.

2. National Quality Forum—www.qualityforum.org/Home.aspxNational Quality Forum (NQF) is a private, not-for-profit organization whose members include consumer advocacy groups, healthcare providers, accrediting bodies, employers and other purchasers of care, and research organizations. The NQF’s mission is to promote improvement in the quality of American health care primarily through defining priorities for improvement, approving consensus standards and metrics for performance reporting, and through educational efforts. The NQF, for example, has endorsed a list of 29 “serious reportable events” in health care that include events related to surgical or invasive procedures, products or device failures, patient protection, care management, environmental issues, radiologic events, and potential criminal events. This list and the CMS list of HACs are both being used by insurers to reduce payment to hospitals/providers as well as to require reporting to state agencies for public review. In 2011, NQF released a set of 41 measures for the quality of pediatric care, largely representing outpatient preventive services and management of chronic conditions, and population-based measures applicable to health plans, for example immunization rates and frequency of well-child care.

3. Leapfrog—www.leapfroggroup.orgLeapfrog is a group of large employers who seek to use their purchasing power to influence the healthcare community to achieve big “leaps” in healthcare safety and quality. Leapfrog promotes transparency and issues public reports of how well individual hospitals meet their recommended standards, including computerized physician-order entry, ICU staffing models, and rates of hospital-acquired infections. There is some evidence that meeting these standards is associated with improved hospital quality and/or mortality outcomes.

4. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality—www.ahrq.govAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is one of 12 agencies within the US Department of Health and Human Services. AHRQ’s primary mission has been to support health services research initiatives that seek to improve the quality of health care in the United States. Its activities extend well beyond the support of research and now include the development of measurements of quality and patient safety, reports on disparities in performance, measures of patient safety culture in organizations, and promotion of tools to improve care among others. AHRQ also convenes expert panels to assess national efforts to advance quality and patient safety and to recommend strategies to accelerate progress.

5. Specialty Society BoardsSpecialty Society Boards, for example, American Board of Pediatrics (ABP). The ABP, along with other specialty certification organizations, has responded to the call for greater accountability to consumers by enhancing its maintenance of certification programs (MOC). All trainees, and an increasing proportion of active practitioners, are now subject to the requirements of the MOC program, including participation in quality improvement activities in the diplomate’s clinical practice. The Board’s mission is focused on assuring the public that certificate holders have been trained according to their standards and also meet continuous evaluation requirements in six areas of core competency: patient care, medical knowledge, practice-based learning and improvement, interpersonal and communication skills, professionalism, and systems-based practice. These are the same competencies as required of residents in training programs as certified by the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education. Providers need not only to be familiar with the principles of quality improvement and patient safety, but also must demonstrate having implemented quality improvement efforts within their practice settings.

6. The Joint Commission—www.jointcommission.orgThe Joint Commission (JC) is a private, nonprofit agency that is licensed to accredit healthcare provider organizations, including hospitals, nursing homes, and other healthcare provider entities in the United States as well as internationally. Its mission is to continuously improve the quality of care through evaluation, education, and enforcement of regulatory standards. Since 2003, JC has annually adopted a set of National Patient Safety Goals designed to help advance the safety of care provided in all healthcare settings. Examples include the use of two patient identifiers to reduce the risk of care being provided to an unintended patient; the use of time-outs and a universal protocol to improve surgical safety and reduce the risk of wrong site procedures; adherence to hand hygiene recommendations to reduce the risk of spreading hospital-acquired infections, to name just a few. These goals often become regulatory standards with time and widespread.

adoption. Failure to meet these standards can result in actions against the licensure of the healthcare provider, or more commonly, requires corrective action plans, measurement to demonstrate improvement, and resurveying depending upon the severity of findings. The JC publishes a monthly journal on quality and safety, available at http://store.jcrinc.com/the-joint-commission-journal-on-quality-and-patient-safety/.

Finally, advances in quality and safety will be impacted by the provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) enacted by the United States government in the past 2 years. These laws and their implications are only beginning to be understood in the United States. The landmark 2010 federal healthcare legislation will provide for near-universal access to health care, and now that the Supreme Court has upheld the law, states are beginning the process of creating healthcare exchanges or deferring to the federal government to do so. It is likely that changes in payment mechanisms for health care will continue irrespective of ARRA/PPACA, and current and future providers’ practices will be economically, structurally, and functionally impacted by these emerging trends. Furthermore, changes in the funding and structure of the US healthcare system may ultimately also result in changes in other countries. Many countries have single-payer systems for providing health care to their citizens and often are leaders in defining new strategies for healthcare improvement.

Wednesday, May 28, 2014


While the history of the patient safety movement can be traced back to Hippocrates’ famous dictum primum non nocere some 2500 years ago, the more modern safety effort was galvanized by the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) 1999 landmark report To Err Is Human. The most quoted statistic from this report, that between 44,000 and 98,000 Americans die each year as a result of medical error, was based upon studies of hospital mortality in Colorado, Utah, and New York and extrapolated to an annual estimate for the country. The IOM followed up this report with a second publication, Crossing the Quality Chasm, in which they said, “Health care today harms too frequently, and routinely fails to deliver its potential benefits…. Between the health care we have and the care we could have lies not just a gap, but a chasm.” These two reports have served as central elements in an advocacy movement that has engaged stakeholders across the continuum of our healthcare delivery system and changed the nature of how we think about the quality of care we provide, and receive.

 http://www.childrenshospitals.net/AM/Images/cht2008/chtsummer08_fundingfig1.jpg

In Crossing the Quality Chasm, the IOM included a simple but elegant definition of the word “Quality” as it applies to health care. They defined six domains of healthcare quality: (1) SAFE—free from preventable harm, (2) EFFECTIVE—optimal clinical outcomes; doing what we should do, not what we should not do according to the evidence, (3) EFFICIENT—without waste of resources—human, financial, supplies/equipment, (4) TIMELY—without unnecessary delay, (5) PATIENT/FAMILY CENTERED—according to the wishes and values of patients and their families, (6) EQUITABLE—eliminating disparities in outcomes between patients of different race, gender, and socioeconomic status.

In the years since these two reports were published, the multiple stakeholders concerned about the effectiveness, safety, and cost of health care in the United States, and indeed throughout the world, have accelerated their individual and collective involvement in analyzing and improving care. In the United States, numerous governmental agencies, large employer groups, health insurance plans, consumers/patients, healthcare providers, and delivery systems are among the key constituencies calling for and working toward better and safer care at lower cost. Similar efforts are occurring internationally. Indeed, the concept of the Triple Aim is now being promoted as an organizing framework for considering the country’s overall healthcare improvement goals.
 
blogger widget

Translate

Categories

Unordered List

Sample Text

Powered by Blogger.

Popular Posts

Recent Posts

Text Widget