Biomedical subjects

E Anne Millman

Publications and source records attributed to E Anne Millman.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2007

Human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis testing and prevalence among surgical patients in an urban university hospital.

BACKGROUND: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B, and hepatitis C represent significant public health problems in an urban community. Early diagnosis and treatment of these infections can improve survival and allow for preventive strategies to reduce further transmission within a community. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical setting as a potential opportunity for early diagnosis of HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C among trauma and non-trauma patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients presenting for surgery over a 10-year period (July 1994 to July 2004) in an urban, university-based general surgical practice that includes all trauma services, as well as emergency department, inpatient, and outpatient surgical consultations. Data collected included diagnosis, operation, age, race, history of intravenous drug abuse, and HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C test results. RESULTS: Among 2876 patients presenting for surgery, testing for blood-borne pathogens was less likely among trauma patients (21%, 79/380) compared to non-trauma patients (47%, 1183/2496) (P < .001). Among patients tested, the incidence of blood-borne pathogens was similar in the two groups: HIV (26% trauma vs 24% non-trauma, not significant [NS]), hepatitis B (4% trauma vs 3% non-trauma, NS), hepatitis C (33% trauma vs 41% non-trauma, NS), and co-infection with HIV and hepatitis C (18% trauma vs 12% non-trauma, NS). In both groups, blood-borne pathogens were associated with intravenous drug abuse (P < .01). CONCLUSION: HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C are common in an urban community among both trauma and non-trauma surgical patients, although testing is less common among trauma patients. Testing of patients during a surgical admission may represent an excellent opportunity for early disease-specific services and preventive interventions.

AIDS Serodiagnosis↗

PubMed2006

Sharpless surgery: a prospective study of the feasibility of performing operations using non-sharp techniques in an urban, university-based surgical practice.

CONTEXT: Percutaneous injuries occur frequently during surgical procedures and represent a significant occupational hazard to operating room personnel. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of performing select general surgical procedures using a combination of non-sharp devices and techniques to replace the conventional use of scalpels and needles. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Candidate procedures for which sharpless techniques could replace conventional scalpels and suture needles were identified preoperatively in an urban, university-based general surgical practice over a 1-year period (June 2003-June 2004). Non-sharp techniques included monomeric 2-octyl cyanoacrylate adhesive, electrocautery, tissue stapler, and minimally invasive instrumentation. Conventional scalpels and suture needles were readily available and used whenever necessary. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We rated the feasibility of performing specific procedures without sharps. We also documented the rate of overall reversion to sharps during operations on patients that had been identified preoperatively as candidates for sharpless surgery. RESULTS: Of 358 procedures performed in the general surgery university practice, 91 were identified preoperatively as appropriate for sharpless surgery. Of these, 86.8% (79/91) were completed without the use of sharps, including 13/22 (59.1%) open laparotomy procedures, 20/22 (90.9%) laparoscopic procedures, and 46/47 (97.8%) soft tissue procedures. Intraoperative reversion to sharps occurred in 12 cases when deemed necessary by the surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: Select common procedures can be performed entirely with sharpless techniques, eliminating the risk to surgical personnel associated with intraoperative percutaneous injuries.

Academic Medical Centers↗

PubMed2006

Operating room teamwork among physicians and nurses: teamwork in the eye of the beholder.

BACKGROUND: Teamwork is an important component of patient safety. In fact, communication errors are the most common cause of sentinel events and wrong-site operations in the US. Although efforts to improve patient safety through improving teamwork are growing, there is no validated tool to scientifically measure teamwork in the surgical setting. STUDY DESIGN: Operating room personnel in 60 hospitals were surveyed using the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire. Surgeons, anesthesiologists, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and operating room nurses rated their own peers and each other using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = very low, 5 = very high). RESULTS: Overall response rate was 77.1% (2,135 of 2,769). Ratings of teamwork differed substantially by operating room caregiver type, with the greatest differences in ratings shown by physicians: surgeons (F[4, 2058] = 41.73, p < 0.001), and anesthesiologists (F[4, 1990] = 53.15, p < 0.001). The percent of operating room caregivers rating the quality of collaboration and communication as "high" or "very high" was different by caregiver role and whether they were rating a peer or another type of caregiver: surgeons rated other surgeons "high" or "very high" 85% of the time, and nurses rated their collaboration with surgeons "high" or "very high" only 48% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable discrepancies in perceptions of teamwork exist in the operating room, with physicians rating the teamwork of others as good, but at the same time, nurses perceive teamwork as mediocre. Given the importance of communication and collaboration in patient safety, health care organizations should measure teamwork using a scientifically valid method. The Safety Attitudes Questionnaire can be used to measure teamwork, identify disconnects between or within disciplines, and evaluate interventions aimed at improving patient safety.

Analysis of Variance↗

PubMed2006

Patient safety in surgery.

BACKGROUND: Improving patient safety is an increasing priority for surgeons and hospitals since sentinel events can be catastrophic for patients, caregivers, and institutions. Patient safety initiatives aimed at creating a safe operating room (OR) culture are increasingly being adopted, but a reliable means of measuring their impact on front-line providers does not exist. METHODS: We developed a surgery-specific safety questionnaire (SAQ) and administered it to 2769 eligible caregivers at 60 hospitals. Survey questions included the appropriateness of handling medical errors, knowledge of reporting systems, and perceptions of safety in the operating room. MANOVA and ANOVA were performed to compare safety results by hospital and by an individual's position in the OR using a composite score. Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis was performed to validate the structure of the scale at the operating room level of analysis. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 77.1% (2135 of 2769), with a range of 57% to 100%. Factor analysis of the survey items demonstrated high face validity and internal consistency (alpha = 0.76). The safety climate scale was robust and internally consistent overall and across positions. Scores varied widely by hospital [MANOVA omnibus F (59, 1910) = 3.85, P < 0.001], but not position [ANOVA F (4, 1910) = 1.64, P = 0.16], surgeon (mean = 73.91), technician (mean = 70.26), anesthesiologist (mean = 71.57), CRNA (mean = 71.03), and nurse (mean = 70.40). The percent of respondents reporting good safety climate in each hospital ranged from 16.3% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Safety climate in surgical departments can be validly measured and varies widely among hospitals, providing the opportunity to benchmark performance. Scores on the SAQ can serve to evaluate interventions to improve patient safety.

Analysis of Variance↗