ReportWire

Tag: Healthcare

  • Hackensack Meridian Mountainside Medical Center Awarded Spring 2023 ‘A’ Hospital Grade from Leapfrog Group

    Hackensack Meridian Mountainside Medical Center Awarded Spring 2023 ‘A’ Hospital Grade from Leapfrog Group

    Newswise — Montclair, NJ – (May 3, 2023) – Hackensack Meridian Mountainside Medical Center received an “A” Hospital Safety Grade from The Leapfrog Group, a national nonprofit upholding the standard of patient safety in hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers. This national distinction celebrates Mountainside Medical Center’s achievements in prioritizing patient safety by protecting patients from preventable harm and errors. The new grades reflect performance primarily during the height of the pandemic.

    “The past few years have been a challenge, but at Mountainside Medical Center never wavered in our commitment to providing safe patient care,” said Tim O’Brien, chief executive officer at Mountainside Medical Center.  “I am proud of the Mountainside team, who understand and work hard to implement patient-first practices.

    The Leapfrog Group, an independent national watchdog organization, assigns an “A,” “B,” “C,” “D” or “F” grade to general hospitals across the country based on over 30 national performance measures reflecting errors, accidents, injuries and infections, as well as systems hospitals have in place to prevent harm.

    “This new update of Hospital Safety Grades shows that, at the national level, we saw deterioration in patient safety with the pandemic,” said Leah Binder, president and CEO of The Leapfrog Group. “But this hospital received an ‘A’ despite those challenges. I congratulate all the leaders, staff, volunteers, and clinicians who together made that possible.”

    The Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade is the only hospital ratings program based exclusively on hospital prevention of medical errors and harm to patients. The grading system is peer-reviewed, fully transparent and free to the public. Grades are updated twice annually, in the fall and spring.

    About Hackensack Meridian Mountainside Medical Center

    Newswise — Hackensack Meridian Mountainside Medical Center has been serving Montclair and its surrounding New Jersey communities since 1891. The hospital provides patients access to innovative and effective treatment in specialized centers within the hospital focused on radiology, women’s health, oncology, surgery, bariatrics, neurosciences, stroke, and cardiovascular services. Mountainside is designated as a Primary Stroke Center by The Joint Commission and The NJ State Department of Health and Senior Services and is one of only a few community hospitals licensed by the State to perform emergency cardiac angioplasty and emergency neuroendovascular procedures. To learn more about Hackensack Meridian Health Mountainside Medical Center visit www.mountainsidehosp.com.

    About The Leapfrog Group                                                                                  

    Founded in 2000 by large employers and other purchasers, The Leapfrog Group is a national nonprofit organization driving a movement for giant leaps for patient safety. The flagship Leapfrog Hospital Survey and new Leapfrog Ambulatory Surgery Center (ASC) Survey collect and transparently report hospital and ASC performance, empowering purchasers to find the highest-value care and giving consumers the lifesaving information they need to make informed decisions. The Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade, Leapfrog’s other main initiative, assigns letter grades to hospitals based on their record of patient safety, helping consumers protect themselves and their families from errors, injuries, accidents and infections. For more, follow us on Twitter and Facebook, and sign up for our newsletter.

     

    ###

    Hackensack Meridian Health (Mountainside Medical Center)

    Source link

  • USC Verdugo Hills Hospital nationally recognized with first ‘A’ hospital safety grade

    USC Verdugo Hills Hospital nationally recognized with first ‘A’ hospital safety grade

    Newswise — LOS ANGELES — For the first time, USC Verdugo Hills Hospital (USC-VHH) earned an “A” Hospital Safety Grade from The Leapfrog Group, an independent national watchdog organization, for achieving the highest national standards in patient safety. This achievement places USC-VHH among top tier hospitals in the nation for safety and quality.  

    “Our entire staff is dedicated to improving and upholding the highest standards of patient care,” said Mary Virgallito, MSN, RN, chief quality officer at USC-VHH. “This score reinforces our ongoing efforts to implement the most current, evidence-based practices for patient safety and outcomes.” 

    The Leapfrog Group assigns letter grades to general hospitals throughout the U.S. based on a hospital’s ability to prevent medical errors and harm to patients. Hospital Safety Grade results are based on more than 30 national performance measures and are updated each fall and spring.  

    “We are proud of the unwavering commitment of our staff in ensuring safety and quality care for our patients and will continue striving to ensure that this is the first ‘A’ grade of many,” said Armand Dorian, MD, MMM, CEO of USC-VHH.  

    USC-VHH recently employed several initiatives to improve quality and patient safety. The hospital has maintained rigorous infection prevention programs and has dedicated staff providing specialized 24-hour care for inpatients, intensive care and labor and delivery through its hospitalist, intensivist and laborist programs.  

    The Leapfrog Group grading system is peer-reviewed, fully transparent and free to the public. To see USC-VHH’s full grade details and access hospital safety tips for patients, visit  hospitalsafetygrade.org. 

    ### 

    For more information about USC Verdugo Hills Hospital, please visit news.KeckMedicine.org. 

    Keck Medicine of USC

    Source link

  • Chegg, Arista, Uber, Pfizer, DuPont, and More Stock Market Movers

    Chegg, Arista, Uber, Pfizer, DuPont, and More Stock Market Movers


    • Order Reprints
    • Print Article

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • ISPOR Marks 25th Anniversary of Flagship Journal Value in Health

    ISPOR Marks 25th Anniversary of Flagship Journal Value in Health

    Newswise — Lawrenceville, NJ, USA—May 2, 2022—Value in Health, the official journal of ISPOR—The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR), published an editorial celebrating its 25th anniversary as the Society’s flagship HEOR journal. The article, “25 Years of Health Economics and Outcomes Research: An Exploration of Value in Health,” appears in the May 2023 issue of Value in Health.

    In 1998, the inaugural Editor-in-Chief laid out a vision for Value in Health to serve as a forum where consensus can be built around development of guidelines for conducting and reporting research in the field. In their editorial, the current Editors-in-Chief, Michael F. Drummond, MCom, DPhil, University of York, York, England, UK, and C. Daniel Mullins, PhD, University of Maryland Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, USA, examine to what extent the content published in Value in Health has contributed to achieving this goal.

    “We mark the 25th anniversary of the journal by examining the changes in the growth and composition of the literature and highlighting some of the key articles from the 25 top-cited items that the journal has published to date,” said Drummond and Mullins. The number of articles published has increased from 58 per year in the period from 1998-2010, to 196 per year in the period 2019-2022. In recent years, the most rapidly growing groups of papers have been those featuring methodological issues, health policy analyses, and systematic literature reviews. Another important change has been the publication of collections of papers in themed sections.

    In addition, since 2011 the journal has published more than 60 ISPOR Reports. These are papers written by official ISPOR member groups and are predominantly Good Practices Reports discussing methodological issues in HEOR. Good Practices Reports have been published in all the major topic areas in the journal’s scope, and many of them are among the top 25 most cited items.

    “When considering the top-cited items as a group, it does seem that a major focus of Value in Health has been on improving the conduct and reporting of HEOR studies and on developing good practice guidelines, consistent with the goal set by the founding editors of the journal,” said Drummond and Mullins. Based on its rich 25-year history, it may come as no surprise that Value in Health has emerged as one of the top-ranked journals in the HEOR field. Value in Health has been indexed in MEDLINE since 2001 when the original impact factor was 2.342. The journal’s most recent impact factor is 5.156, demonstrating the major impact Value in Health has had on the field of health economics and outcomes research.

    “As the journal’s current Editors-in-Chief, we are committed to continuing to advance HEOR science and methods,” said Drummond and Mullins. “At the same time, we hope that the advancement in scientific rigor will also motivate even greater acceptance by payers, prescribers, and policy makers of those HEOR articles that apply best practices of HEOR methods to address real-world decision making by payers, prescribers, and policy makers. In turn, this will influence which evidence-based drugs and health technologies are accessed by patients and the public. As that occurs, both Value in Health and the field of HEOR will achieve the potential of improving global public health, extending life, and improving health-related quality of life.”

    For more information about the 25 most cited articles in Value in Health, view the special collection here.

    ###

     

    ABOUT ISPOR
    ISPOR, the professional society for health economics and outcomes research (HEOR), is an international, multistakeholder, nonprofit dedicated to advancing HEOR excellence to improve decision making for health globally. The Society is the leading source for scientific conferences, peer-reviewed and MEDLINE®-indexed publications, good practices guidance, education, collaboration, and tools/resources in the field.
    Website  | LinkedIn  | Twitter (@ispororg)  |  YouTube  |  Facebook  |  Instagram  

     

    ABOUT VALUE IN HEALTH
    Value in Health (ISSN 1098-3015) is an international, indexed journal that publishes original research and health policy articles that advance the field of health economics and outcomes research to help healthcare leaders make evidence-based decisions. The journal’s 2021 impact factor score is 5.156 and its 5-year impact factor score is 6.779. Value in Health is ranked 9th of 88 journals in health policy and services, 18th of 109 journals in healthcare sciences and services, and 50th of 381 journals in economics. Value in Health is a monthly publication that circulates to more than 10,000 readers around the world.
    Website  | Twitter (@isporjournals)

    ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research

    Source link

  • Clinical Trials by Desai Sethi Urology Institute Researchers Simultaneously Presented at AUA and Published in Journal of Urology

    Clinical Trials by Desai Sethi Urology Institute Researchers Simultaneously Presented at AUA and Published in Journal of Urology

    BYLINE: Lisette Hilton

    Newswise — Novel research by investigators at the Desai Sethi Urology Institute (DSUI) at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine was presented at one of the world’s most important urology meetings and simultaneously published in one of the highest impact journals in the specialty.

    This reflects the quality of research at the DSUI, as this is the first time the Journal of Urology earmarked and simultaneously published American Urological Association (AUA) annual meeting presentations, according to Ranjith Ramasamy, M.D., director of reproductive urology at DSUI.

    Two studies, one on a type of short-acting testosterone therapy and another looking at whether platelet-rich plasma (PRP) works to treat erectile dysfunction (ED), were presented during the April 28 to May 1 AUA 2023 meeting in Chicago and published online the day of each presentation in the Journal of Urology.

    “These were randomized clinical trials, which offer the best evidence but also are the most challenging and arduous to conduct,” Dr. Ramasamy said. “They reflect the primary focus of the DSUI, which is to conduct investigator-initiated clinical trials.”

    These studies also offer new information for clinicians and patients on common approaches used to treat common conditions, according to Thomas Masterson, M.D., assistant professor of urology.

    Does PRP Help Men with Erectile Dysfunction?

    Traditional treatments for erectile dysfunction focus on pathways that treat ED symptoms without reversing underlying ED causes. The most popular restorative therapies today are shockwave therapy, platelet-rich plasma and stem cell therapy. Restorative therapies have the potential to reverse the underlying pathology of ED.

    “All three of these are not FDA approved for ED, and there is not a lot of good research on them,” said Dr. Masterson, who was the author of the study.

    “While some small studies have shown potential benefits for platelet-rich plasma, popularly called the “P-shot,” larger and more rigorous clinical trials are needed to fully evaluate the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma therapy for erectile dysfunction,” said Dr. Manuel Molina, a men’s health fellow and sub-investigator in the clinical trial.

    DSUI investigators are the first to show using PRP was no better than using placebo to treat ED patients.

    “This finding may prompt health care providers to reconsider the use of platelet-rich plasma therapy as a viable treatment option for erectile dysfunction until further research provides more conclusive evidence,” said Braian Ledesma, a student and study coordinator. Ledesma presented this finding as a late-breaking abstract at the AUA annual meeting.

    Patients need to be informed consumers, according to Dr. Masterson.

    “This study is the first negative study suggesting PRP, which can be very expensive, may not be any better than a placebo,” he said.

    Are Some Types of Testosterone Therapy Safer Than Others?

    There are several forms of testosterone therapy, including those that are injected intramuscularly or subcutaneously, applied to the skin or taken orally as pills, as well as intranasal gel, which is applied on and absorbed into the nasal mucosa.

    “Traditional forms of testosterone therapy are known to increase hematocrit, which is the percentage of red blood cells in your blood. That could lead to a risk of cardiovascular events, like heart attacks, blood clots or stroke,” said Marco-Jose Rivero, an author on the study and a Miami Andrology Research Scholar at DSUI. “Our objective for this trial was to evaluate and compare intramuscular testosterone therapy versus intranasal testosterone gel, with regards to whether or not they increase hematocrit.”

    This is the first head-to-head study comparing the two, according to Dr. Ramasamy. Men were randomized to receive either intramuscular testosterone, which is administered every two weeks by injection, or the nasal gel, which is applied two to three times daily.

    The researchers found that intramuscular testosterone does increase hematocrit levels, while intranasal testosterone gel does not. And intranasal testosterone gel may be a better option for patients with cardiovascular risk factors and others who want to avoid the potential side effect, according to Rivero.

    “This finding is important because we do believe the increased red blood cell count or hematocrit is what puts people at risk of cardiovascular or thrombotic events,” said Russell Saltzman, the clinical trial coordinator.

    Rivero, a medical student, said that his working on such an impactful randomized clinical trial has allowed him to gain research experience in a rigorous study design, while also further developing his ability to care for patients.

    “I am grateful for the opportunity to share my findings with a national audience, through both a poster presentation at the AUA and a publication in the Journal of Urology,” Rivero said.

    University of Miami Health System, Miller School of Medicine

    Source link

  • Connecticut Magazine’s 2023 “Top Doctors” issue recognizes 82 Smilow Cancer Hospital and Yale Cancer Center physicians

    Connecticut Magazine’s 2023 “Top Doctors” issue recognizes 82 Smilow Cancer Hospital and Yale Cancer Center physicians

    Newswise — Each year, Connecticut Magazine recognizes some of the state’s best physicians, who provide exceptional care for patients, with its annual “Top Doctors” issue. This year’s list includes 82 physicians from Smilow Cancer Hospital and Yale Cancer Center, the only National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center in the state.

    “It is wonderful for many of us to be included on the 2023 list of top cancer doctors in Connecticut,” said Eric Winer, MD, director of Yale Cancer Center and physician-in-chief of Smilow. “This is a top honor, and we are grateful for the recognition and the support.”

    The magazine partnered with Castle Connolly, a leading national health care research firm, to compile the annual list of the state’s top physicians. Castle Connolly’s extensive survey identified more than 1,600 Connecticut physicians, all nominated by their peers and vetted to meet the criteria to earn the designation of “Top Doctors.” In other words, these are the cancer experts who other doctors recommend. The complete “Top Doctors” list appears in the May 2023 issue of Connecticut Magazine.

    Congratulations to this year’s “Top Doctors” affiliated with Smilow Cancer Hospital and Yale Cancer Center:

     

    Top Doctors

    Nita Ahuja — Surgery

    Michael Alperovich — Surgery

    Harry Aslanian — Gastroenterology

    Masoud Azodi — Gynecologic Oncology

    Joachim Baehring — Neurology

    Elizabeth Berger — Breast Surgical Oncology

    Jean Bolognia — Dermatology

    Robert Bona — Hematology & Oncology

    D. Barry Boyd — Medical Oncology

    James Clune — Surgery

    Michael Cohenuram — Thoracic Oncology

    John Colberg — Urology

    Frank Detterbeck — Thoracic Surgery

    Kevin Du — Therapeutic Radiology

    Andrew Duffy — Surgery

    Beverly Drucker — Medical Oncology

    Richard Edelson — Dermatology

    Neal Fischbach — Medical Oncology

    Francine Foss — Medical Oncology-Hematology-Oncology

    Gary Frielaender —Pathology-Musculoskeletal Oncology

    Scott Gettinger — Thoracic Oncology-Medical Oncology

    Michael Girardi — Dermatology

    Earl Glusac — Pathology-Dermatology

    Rachel Greenup — Breast Surgical Oncology

    Roy Herbst — Medical Oncology-Thoracic Oncology

    Susan Higgins — Therapeutic Radiology-Breast Cancer Radiotherapy

    Silvio Inzucchi —Endocrinology-Diabetes Medicine & Management

    Gary Israel — Radiology-Biomedical Imaging

    Dhanpat Jain — Pathology-Internal Medicine (Digestive Diseases)

    Priya Jamidar — Gastroenterology-Hepatology

    Michele Johnson — Radiology-Biomedical Imaging

    Kimberly Johung — Therapeutic Radiology

    Benjamin Judson — Surgery

    Jennifer Kapo — Internal Medicine-Hospice & Palliative Care

    Patrick Kenney — Urology

    Sajid Khan — Surgical Oncology-Gastrointestinal Surgery

    Sanjay Kulkarni — Surgery

    Pamela Kunz — Medical Oncology

    Jill Lacy — Medical Oncology

    Johanna LaSala — Medical Oncology-Hematology & Oncology

    Stephen Lattanzi — Medical Oncology

    Alfred Lee — Hematology

    Merlin Lee (M.Sung Lee) — Hematology-Oncology 

    David Lefell — Dermatology

    Jonathan Leventhal ­­— Dermatology

    Walter Longo — Surgery

    Maryam Lustberg — Breast Oncology 

    David Madoff — Radiology-Biomedical Imaging 

    Asher Marks — Pediatric Hematology & Oncology 

    Kelsey Martin — Hematology & Oncology 

    Bruce McGibbon —Therapeutic Radiology 

    Saral Mehra — Surgery

    Ehud Mendel — Neurosurgery 

    Jon Morrow — Pathology 

    David Mulligan — Surgery 

    Justin Persico — Medical Oncology 

    Daniel Petrylak — Medical Oncology-Urology 

    Jeffrey Pollak — Radiology-Biomedical Imaging 

    Jennifer Possick — Thoracic Oncology

    Lajos Pusztai — Medical Oncology, Breast Oncology

    Elena Ratner — Gynecologic Oncology 

    Vikram Reddy — Colon and Rectal Surgery

    David Rimm — Pathology-Medical Oncology

    Kenneth Roberts — Therapeutic Radiology-Medical Oncology

    Alessandro Santin — Gynecologic Oncology

    Ronald Salem — Surgery

    Niketa Shah — Hematology & Oncology

    Sangini Sheth — Gynecologic Oncology

    Dinish Singh — Urology

    Kathleen Suozzi — Dermatology

    Gordon Sze — Radiology-Biomedical Imaging

    Mario Sznol — Medical Oncology 

    Lynn Tanoue — Pulmonology & Sleep Medicine

    Kelsey Martin Thompson — Hematology

    Hugh Taylor — Gynecologic Oncology

    Juan Vasquez — Pediatric Hematology-Oncology

    Jeffrey Weinreb — Radiology-Biomedical Imaging

    Lynn Wilson — Therapeutic Radiology

    Eric Winer — Medical Oncology

    David Witt — Medical Oncology

    George Yavorek — Colorectal Surgery

    Nwanmegha Young — Clinical Surgery

    *Alex Choi in the Palliative Care Program at Smilow Cancer Hospital was also named a 2023 Castle Connolly Rising Star

    Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital

    Source link

  • New Jersey’s Temporary Health Care License Program Expanded Mental Health Services During Pandemic

    New Jersey’s Temporary Health Care License Program Expanded Mental Health Services During Pandemic

    BYLINE: Nicole Swenarton

    Newswise — At least 3,700 out-of-state mental health providers utilized New Jersey’s COVID-19 Temporary Emergency Reciprocity Licensure program to provide mental health services to more than 30,000 New Jersey patients during the first year of the pandemic, according to a Rutgers study.

    The study, published in The Journal of Medical Regulation, surveyed health care practitioners who received a temporary license in New Jersey to examine the impact of the temporary licensure program on access to mental health care.

    “The New Jersey program enabled patients with already-established care to maintain care continuity and patients seeking new care to have increased access to mental health services,” said Ann Nguyen, an assistant research professor at the Center for State Health Policy at the Rutgers Institute for Health, Health Care Policy and Aging Research (IFH) and the lead author of the study.

    When New Jersey became a COVID-19 hotspot in March 2020, the state enacted the program to allow out-of-state, licensed health care providers to obtain a temporary license to provide COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 care to New Jersey residents via telecommunication technologies or in-person. According to research on temporary licensure reciprocity, at least 45 states waived or modified existing rules to allow health care providers to work across state lines through temporary licensure programs during the pandemic.

    One in five adults in the United States experience mental illness each year and 1,112,000 adults in New Jersey have a mental health condition, according to the National Alliance on Mental Illness. In February 2021, more than 42 percent of adults in New Jersey reported symptoms of anxiety or depression.

    With increasing deaths attributed to drugs, alcohol and suicide and a shortage of mental health providers throughout the U.S., Rutgers researchers said increasing access to mental health services is crucial.

    “Increased access to mental health services for even one individual, let alone over 30,000, has the potential to save lives,” Nguyen said.

    Researchers found that mental health care practitioners included in the study conversed with patients in at least 13 languages and about 53 percent of practitioners served at least one patient from an underserved racial or ethnic minority group.

    The study findings have implications for long-term licensure reciprocity mechanisms, such as interstate licensure compacts, designed to allow health care providers to have primary or home state licensure as well as either a multistate license or an option for expedited additional licenses, the researchers said.

    “As states consider enacting laws to join interstate licensure compacts, policymakers should think through the ways in which more flexible and portable licensure can enhance access to the mental health workforce, especially for patients who are historically underserved, and mitigate the workforce supply crisis,” said Nguyen.

    Coauthors of the study include Jolene Chou of the Center for State Health Policy; Elissa Kozlov, Danielle Llaneza and Molly Nowels of Rutgers of Rutgers School of Public Health; and Magda Schaler-Haynes of Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health.

    Rutgers University-New Brunswick

    Source link

  • I’m A Doctor Who Almost Died Because My Own Doctors Refused To Do This 1 Basic Thing

    I’m A Doctor Who Almost Died Because My Own Doctors Refused To Do This 1 Basic Thing

    My day had started early that Friday. My wife, Joanne, and I arrived at 7 a.m. for my 10-year follow up colonoscopy with Dr. Smith. Although I had referred a number of my patients to his group, I hadn’t worked much with him or even met him. As the nurse was going through her checklist of tasks, she casually mentioned that he was retiring that day and a party was scheduled that evening.

    I was taken into the procedure room on time and 30 minutes later I woke up in the recovery room.

    “Dr. Mieczkowski, everything went well,” Dr. Smith told me. “I removed one large polyp and a few smaller ones, but none of them concern me. My office will let you know the results in a few days.”

    I thanked him and offered best wishes on his retirement, thinking that I would never see him again. I was relieved ― no signs of cancer.

    Joanne and I went home to eat lunch. Since I felt well, we drove to the office to do some paperwork. Around 2:45 p.m., I had an urgent need to use the bathroom and passed streaks of blood. I knew this was common after a colonoscopy, so I didn’t tell Joanne or call the doctor’s office. Fifteen minutes later, I felt more urgency and made another hurried trip to the bathroom. There was more blood ― a lot more blood.

    “Oh shit! Damn it,” I said out loud.

    I told Joanne what was going on, and she asked, “Do you want me to call the EMTs? Are you feeling faint?” We decided to drive ourselves to a hospital only a few miles away. I called the physician’s office with an update while we were on our way.

    Upon arrival, I was relieved to see that the waiting room was empty. I checked in at the desk and a few minutes later, a nurse opened the door. “Dr. Mieczkowski? Come on back,” she told me.

    I made it. I’m going to be all right, I thought. I took a deep breath of relief as Joanne and I walked through the door and were led to my room. The nurse did the usual check-in tasks, connected me to the monitor tracking my heart rate and blood pressure, put an IV in my arm, and drew blood for testing.

    “No running fluids?” I questioned. “That’ll be up to the doctor after he sees you,” she replied. As she finished, I felt an urgent need to move my bowels and requested a bedside commode. I quickly passed several pints of blood, which nearly filled the container. I had just lost nearly 20% of my blood volume. I was stunned and knew that I was in trouble.

    “So, you’re Dr. Mieczkowski,” Dr. Woods, the ER doctor, said sarcastically as he walked in. Great! Here we go, I thought. “Yup, that’s me,” I replied, trying to reduce the tension. I pointed out the blood in the commode, but Dr. Woods didn’t seem impressed.

    While taking my medical history and doing a brief exam, he was constantly looking up at the monitor, which showed a heart rate of 62 and a normal blood pressure. (Typically, a person’s heart rate goes up to compensate for blood loss.) He commented on the low heart rate as an indication that I was stable. I was puzzled. “Dr. Woods, I’m on a high dose of a beta blocker for my blood pressure,” I told him. “My heart rate is always around 50 and never gets above 80.” It didn’t alter his thinking. I asked whether he was going to start running IV fluids and order blood transfusions. “You look pretty stable,” he answered. “I think we can hold off for now until the labs come back. We’ll see how it goes.”

    I was dumbfounded. I had 40 years of experience. If I saw that amount of blood loss in a 62-year-old male with heart disease on aspirin ― a potent blood thinner ― I would have called for an immediate GI (gastrointestinal) consult, started IV fluids, and ordered blood to be ready for transfusion. Unfortunately, he jumped to a conclusion that my bleeding couldn’t be serious since my heart rate was low. He was running the show and damned if he was going to listen to me.

    I continued to pass a large amount of blood every 20-30 minutes. Since the blood-filled commode had not been emptied, I used the bathroom across the hall. I was not thinking clearly at this point and failed to note the blood loss was not being measured. I always ordered nurses to monitor a patient’s blood loss and urine output. I became weaker and paler with each episode, and I began to worry that I was going to bleed out. I held back on sharing my fears with Joanne.

    The author on “a bad day at home in June 2018,” he writes. “This was seven months after hemorrhage. I was still trying to work and find an attorney to sue the doctors for malpractice.”

    Courtesy of Lawrence Mieczkowski

    My condition deteriorated as the hours passed in the ER. The lab results documented the drop in my blood volume. My anxiety level grew ― another sign of worsening shock. I buzzed the nurse’s station and asked to have Dr. Woods come back. When he arrived, I went through my list of concerns. I asked again about getting blood and platelet transfusions.

    “Where’s the GI consult for a repeat colonoscopy?” I asked. Dr. Woods had had enough of my questions. He interrupted me and said, “You know, Dr. Mieczkowski, you may have more grey hair in your beard than me, but this isn’t my first rodeo.” My wife and I looked at each other stunned! He went on, “I think you’re overreacting, and I’m sure you’re anxious. Why don’t I give you some lorazepam to calm you down.” I was in the hands of a doctor I didn’t know or trust, and he refused to listen to my concerns.

    It was around 5:30 p.m. at this point. Then, to my surprise, Dr. Smith entered my room. He asked a few questions, peeked into the bedside commode, listened to my heart and abdomen and poked around a bit. I reiterated my worries and asked directly, “Are you going to do a repeat colonoscopy now?” He paused for a long while before finally answering, “Why don’t we wait this out and do a repeat colonoscopy tomorrow morning if you’re still bleeding. I’ll admit you to the hospitalist service.”

    I knew from my own experiences that physicians always have to weigh the pros and cons of doing another procedure versus close observation. He had to know that a GI bleed is more serious in an older patient with heart disease on a blood thinner. What was I supposed to do now? We obviously disagreed about the next steps, but I couldn’t plead my case any further. He was delaying a potentially lifesaving procedure ― one of the major causes of serious adverse events. I couldn’t help but think that the evening retirement party influenced his decision.

    Around 7 p.m., one of the hospitalists on duty visited me. He was thorough and, unlike Dr. Woods, he was respectful of my experience. He gave orders for blood and platelet transfusions, started IV fluids and admitted me to a medical unit upstairs. Since he was ending his shift, he assured me the night shift hospitalist would check in on me. Joanne and I were anxious to get out of the emergency room and off the hands of Dr. Woods. I was relieved.

    Unfortunately, my bleeding continued in my new room. I noted that my nurse placed a basin in the toilet to measure my blood loss. When she saw the volume, she was startled and asked if I had been experiencing that level of blood loss all day. “Yes, and they never measured the blood loss,” Joanne told her.

    The hours passed, and I lost track of time. I kept asking, “Where’s the blood?” The nurse kept replying, “It’s been ordered. We’re still waiting.” I was getting colder and less aware of my surroundings. I drifted in and out of sleep but felt my wife’s hand on me constantly. I knew she was scared. I was bleeding out, albeit more slowly than a person with a gunshot wound in their abdomen.

    It was around 11:30 p.m. when a sense of calm started to come over me ― it was an acceptance that I might die peacefully in bed. So this is what it feels like to die, I thought. I was no longer afraid. “I’m going to die,” I said in a whisper. I can’t imagine how Joanne felt. My nurse got startled briefly, but she was experienced with critically ill patients and called in her team.

    Within seconds more nurses arrived, and they took control since the hospitalist was nowhere to be found. Two additional IV catheters were placed for rapid infusion of fluids and blood in order to keep me alive. My nurse phoned Dr. James, the on-call GI specialist and one of my friends. She gave him an update and then handed me the phone. “Larry, we need to do the colonoscopy now,” he told me. “I’ll be there within the hour.”

    The author, his wife Joanne and their mini-bernedoodle, Cookie, in July 2020.
    The author, his wife Joanne and their mini-bernedoodle, Cookie, in July 2020.

    Courtesy of Lawrence Mieczkowski

    The blood and platelets were delivered soon after, and within minutes it seemed the internal bleeding was slowing since the cramping and urgency had lessened. At 1:30 a.m., the nurses wheeled me down to the endoscopy suite. Dr. James arrived, and I was asleep within seconds of getting the anesthetic. He used four titanium clips to clamp an artery bleeding from the site of where the large polyp had been removed. Lab testing confirmed that I had lost nearly 50% of my blood volume.

    I was discharged later that Saturday morning. Unfortunately, the shock and blood loss had damaged my heart, kidneys, and affected my thinking and memory. My condition worsened and after undergoing tests locally and at the Mayo Clinic, I was diagnosed with congestive heart failure, stage III kidney failure and chronic anemia. Despite adjustment in medicines, I still couldn’t handle the rigorous requirements of practicing medicine and my daily life, and I was advised by my PCP to stop working and pursue disability.

    It was very difficult to accept this recommendation, and I was very angry. I loved my work. I had just moved into a newly remodeled office and, because I was so ill, I didn’t have six months to negotiate the sale of my practice ― I had to close my business. I tried to get a malpractice lawyer to represent me but after six rejections I was finished. Fortunately, I had good disability insurance.

    Why do physicians miss a diagnosis or screw up on treatment plans? What’s more, why do too many of them not listen to their patients ― the most basic thing that should be a fundamental part of their practice?

    Dr. Woods didn’t really want to consider my concerns, but he and Dr. Smith also failed to put all the pieces of the puzzle together, whether it was because of ego, putting too much importance on my low heart rate, or being distracted by a retirement party. They both had plenty of time for my evaluation and should have thoughtfully weighed my worries.

    Unfortunately, my experience is common since adverse events occur in a reported 25% of hospital admissions. If you find yourself in one of these adverse events like I did, here is some advice that may be useful:

    1. Resist yelling at the nurse or physician. It doesn’t help, and you may get labeled as “a difficult patient,” which could make matters worse.

    2. If you are not being heard, get the unit’s charge nurse or manager involved early in the conflict since any delay may be a life-or-death issue. Because patients are randomly assigned to a hospital-based physician, these nurses can arrange a transfer to another physician’s care or get other specialists involved.

    3. If you’re very ill and at a small community hospital, you should consider pushing for a transfer to a larger hospital and, if necessary, contact the hospital’s quality, risk management, or medical director’s office. This almost always guarantees action since no hospital wants to be sued.

    4. Outpatient medical practice is very different from hospital-based care. The former is now volume driven and also rife with missed diagnoses, delays in treatment and unsatisfactory office visits. Nurse practitioners (NP) and physician assistants (PA) have similar outcomes as physicians, often have more time to spend with their patients and have high satisfaction ratings. However, ask to schedule a visit with the physician if you’re dissatisfied with the care of the NP or PA.

    5. Improving communication with your provider may be aided by bringing another person with you to your appointment and having them serve as an advocate.

    The author at home in July 2021.
    The author at home in July 2021.

    Courtesy of Lawrence Mieczkowski

    6. Since computers are now standard in most exam rooms, a provider may only spend 8-10 minutes face to face with you during a 20-minute appointment. Prepare for your visit by reading about your problem. For example, the Cleveland Clinic’s website has a great graphic depicting which organs may be causing abdominal pain. Type a list of your concerns but keep it focused, as, unfortunately, most physicians don’t have time to thoroughly address a long list of issues. Review your list with the medical assistant and ask them to scan it into your records.

    7. Primary care providers may not consider a diagnosis they don’t often see. Requesting an ultrasound if the pain is severe or not improving may save your life. If the provider says that you don’t need it, you can get a self-funded ultrasound for less than $200 in many states. Take your concerns to the office manager or a director overseeing the practice.

    8. Unfortunately, I don’t see a return to the times when doctors spent 30 minutes with a patient. Paying PCPs more for their time would quickly change the system, but it’s not going to happen. Medicine has morphed into big business with trillions of dollars spent each year. Finding a great provider may be a challenge but there are well-trained doctors, NPs and PAs out there who will listen to you. Word of mouth referrals are often the best. Reviews of physicians on hospital websites are not helpful in my experience, so check out independent sites when possible.

    9. View your first couple of visits with a new practice as an interview and move on if it’s not a fit. Remember, you can always end a long-standing relationship with a practice. If you decide to divorce your provider, send a certified letter to the administrator of the practice explaining why you are leaving.

    We physicians know the healthcare system is broken. Hospital executives are overpaid. Since PCPs are paid on average $180,000 versus the $500,000 an orthopedic surgeon makes, the best and brightest medical students often pursue highly paid specialty positions. Physicians are overbooked, overwhelmed, tired and burned out. Computerized medical records have made it worse. The end result is often poor patient outcomes. Since you can’t change the system, you have to learn how to navigate through its waves using some of the suggestions that I have made.

    After my experience, I was certain that I wouldn’t survive a year but it’s now been over five years. My kidney function and anemia have improved. I am still dealing daily with my heart failure, restricting salt, resting for hours at a time and reducing my activities. I was able to resume golfing. Through my physicians’ support and the love and tender care of my wife and others, I have accepted what happened to me. It’s not what I had envisioned a decade ago, but I have a good quality of life. In the end, I survived, but I came too close to death that should have been easily prevented.

    Note: Names and some identifying details have been changed to protect the privacy of individuals mentioned in this essay.

    Lawrence Mieczkowski, M.D., aka Dr. Mitch, is the author of a series of op-ed pieces promoting healthcare reform published in The Dayton Daily News in 2008-09. He has lectured extensively on diabetes and cardiovascular topics across the U.S., Canada, and the lower Gulf countries of Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, and the UAE. He continues to write his memoir of living with PTSD since childhood.

    Do you have a compelling personal story you’d like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we’re looking for here and send us a pitch.

    Source link

  • Roswell Park Nurses Share Their Innovative Practices at Oncology Nursing Society Annual Congress

    Roswell Park Nurses Share Their Innovative Practices at Oncology Nursing Society Annual Congress

    (PLEASE NOTE INDIVIDUAL EMBARGO TIMES BELOW)

    • New inpatient admission process designed by Transplant & Cellular Therapy team
    • Critical-care nurse rounding reduces rapid responses, codes
    • Nurses create tool to identify patients who would benefit from palliative care

    Newswise — SAN ANTONIO, Texas — Evidence-based practice changes led by nurses from Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center will be highlighted at the 48th annual Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) Congress April 26-30, 2023, in San Antonio, Texas.

    Hector Tirado, BSN, AAS, CPhT, will present “Standardized Transplant and Cellular Therapy Patient Education Upon Admission,” describing a new admissions protocol developed by nurses for inpatients in Roswell Park’s Transplant and Cellular Therapy (TCT) Center. The protocol centers on a checklist designed to ensure consistency and comprehensiveness in every inpatient admission.

    “The admissions process can be very overwhelming,” explains Tirado, first author of the paper. “There are a lot of moving parts. We created a system to make the experience uniform and standardized so every patient is getting the same education. It’s a great tool.”

    “There is a lot that has to be communicated and documented when we’re admitting someone for transplant or cell therapy, because we know these patients will be admitted for at least 30 days,” adds Amanda Blackburn, BSN, RN, co-author of the paper. Although patients and their caregivers attend an orientation together prior to the patient’s admission, Blackburn says repeating some of the information during admission is essential because so much is introduced during the orientation. “It’s information overload. People can’t remember everything.

    “Research shows that repetition improves outcomes in patients. So we go over the timeline of what to expect: ‘This is your preconditioning chemotherapy. Here’s what to expect on Day 0, Day 7, Day 10, and at discharge.’ ”

    Tirado and Blackburn created the new admissions checklist as a project for their nursing residency training at Roswell Park. They began with an electronic survey distributed to TCT nurses in March 2022, using software to consolidate responses. After receiving input from their colleagues, the team sent nurses a first draft of the checklist and then revised it based on their feedback. The team developed a separate template for nursing aides who set up rooms for new TCT inpatients. The lists cover a range of instructions, from what to do if the patient has tested positive for COVID-19 to placing precautions signage on the door, verifying allergies and educating patients about how to use the call bell.

    The list also reminds nurses to encourage patients to use an incentive spirometer to clear mucus from their lungs to help prevent pulmonary infection. Blackburn notes that since the checklist became standard practice, she has noticed more patients using spirometers throughout their stay. “It helps prevent pneumonia, which is a big risk factor for our patients,” she says.

    Tirado notes that the team paid close attention to the language used for the patient-education sections of the tool. “That’s important because of healthcare literacy,” he says. “We need to use words that patients understand.”

    Blackburn adds that along with increased patient safety and comfort, the new protocol has resulted in an added benefit: “Our nurses are more confident while doing an admission.”

    Tirado will outline the new system and its impacts in a podium presentation (embargo lifts) Friday, April 28, from 3-4 p.m.

    Reducing rapid responses and codes through critical-care nurse rounding

    Today, most cancer treatment is provided on an outpatient basis. Inpatient care is required mostly for complex procedures, the administration of biotherapies and some types of chemotherapy, and dealing with treatment complications and symptom management. Michael Martonara, BSN, BS, RN, will discuss the implications of this need for a higher level of nursing care during a poster presentation, “The Effects of Proactive Critical-Care Nurse Rounding with High-Risk Patients in a Dedicated Cancer Hospital,” (embargo lifts) Thursday, April 27, from 6:10-6:20 p.m.

    Martonara, first author of the presentation, developed a proactive “SWAT” model of rounding at Roswell Park and successfully advocated for its funding, leading to a 12-hour-per-day increase in critical-care nurse staffing for high-risk patients at the 142-bed dedicated cancer hospital. Over a trial period of seven months, SWAT nurses rounded daily to each inpatient unit, where staff identified patients at risk of clinical deterioration and those discharged from critical care the previous day. The SWAT nurses then assessed those patients for needed interventions.

    Thanks to early intervention, the need for rapid responses involving staff outside the Critical Care Unit fell from 4.5 per 1,000 patient days in the seven months prior to the SWAT program to 3.5 in the seven months after the program began. Codes outside the Critical Care Unit, signaling that a patient was in medical distress, dropped from .48 per 1,000 patient days in the seven months before implementation to .16 in the following seven months. The reduction in rapid responses and codes resulted in less disruption and the use of fewer resources, the nurse researchers note.

    The poster presentation was co-authored by Andrew Storer, PhD, DNP, RN, NP-C, A, FAANP, Vice President and Deputy Chief Nursing Officer.

    Palliative care screening tool delivers multiple benefits

    Heather Huizinga, MSN, RN, OCN, Director of Nursing Professional Development, Professional Practice, and Research, assisted a team of nurse residents — Kayla Redmond, BSN, RN; Christina Haidar, BSN, RN; Evgenii Ryzhkov, BSN, RN; and Carly Andriaccio, AAS, RN — in creating a poster presentation about their independently designed screening process to identify patients who would benefit from palliative care. The team will present “Creation of a Nurse-Driven Palliative Oncology Screening Tool,” outlining the benefits of making early introduction to palliative care services the standard of care for oncology inpatients: reduced symptom burden, better communication with healthcare providers, reduced emotional distress and greater patient satisfaction.

    A nurse survey informed the development of the screening tool. The team’s pilot analysis in 18 inpatients identified that a majority would benefit from palliative and supportive care, but had not yet been scheduled for a consult based on existing assessment aids.

    “Many palliative care screening tools are not specific enough to triage the needs of oncology patients with metastatic disease,” the authors note in their presentation. “The final tool can appropriately discern medical and surgical oncology patients who could benefit from palliative care.”

    The poster presentation is scheduled for (embargo lifts) Friday, April 28, from 5:50-6 p.m.

    ###

    Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center is a community united by the drive to eliminate cancer’s grip on humanity by unlocking its secrets through personalized approaches and unleashing the healing power of hope. Founded by Dr. Roswell Park in 1898, it is the only National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center in Upstate New York. Learn more at www.roswellpark.org, or contact us at 1-800-ROSWELL (1-800-767-9355) or [email protected].

    Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center

    Source link

  • AANA Presents Excellence in State Government Relations Advocacy Award to New Mexico

    AANA Presents Excellence in State Government Relations Advocacy Award to New Mexico

    Newswise — ROSEMONT, Ill.   (AANA)— The American Association of Nurse Anesthesiology (AANA) will honor the New Mexico Association of Nurse Anesthetists (NMANA) with the Excellence in State Government Relations Advocacy Award at its Mid-Year Assembly, held in Washington, D.C., April 29 – May 3.

    The Excellence in State Government Relations Advocacy Award, established in 2016, is presented annually to a state association based on the quality of its efforts in the state legislative or regulatory arena for the nurse anesthesiology profession. The recipient is chosen by the AANA Government Relations Committee.

    In connection with legislative efforts to pursue full practice authority, the NMANA determined a need for more outreach to its membership and made great improvements in its ability to communicate with members quickly and frequently. This includes monthly communications from the president regarding legislative efforts, weekly zoom meetings during the legislative session, and increased grassroots involvement. These new communications tactics have resulted in a 40% growth in NMANA membership, from 180 to 250, during the past five years.

    The NMANA leadership includes CRNAs with years of experience, as well as new NMANA board members who are mentored and empowered to work to their full potential. “Utilizing the strengths of CRNAs with diverse backgrounds and thinking has brought strength to the NMANA team and a bright future for New Mexico CRNAs,” NMANA President Shannon Allen, DNAP, CRNA, FAANA, said. “We are honored to be recognized by the AANA for our achievements.”

    To further engage its membership and raise the visibility, awareness and influence of CRNAs in New Mexico, the NMANA board traveled the state, connecting with CRNAs and their legislators, improving CRNA engagement, and educating legislators about the high-quality care that CRNAs provide to patients in the state. Increased member engagement resulted in a record breaking increase in PAC donations.

    “As a result, the relationships NMANA developed with the governor and legislators will benefit CRNAs for years to come,” Allen said. “Thank you to the many New Mexico CRNAs who continue to fight to protect CRNA practice in the state.”

    To support their legislative efforts, the NMANA secured strong backing from a broad coalition, including APRN and nursing associations, and the state hospital association, as well as individual physicians and surgeons, dentists, podiatrists, patients and facility CEOs. NMANA also launched a strong public relations advocacy campaign to educate legislators and the public through social media, billboards, newspapers, radio ads and interviews. The NMANA also worked with the New Mexico State University to get the state’s first CRNA program off the ground and it is on track to begin this fall.

    As advanced practice registered nurses, CRNAs are members of one of the most trusted professions according to Gallup. CRNAs provide anesthesia care across all settings and in all patient populations and are the primary anesthesia providers in rural and underserved areas and on the battlefield in forward surgical teams.

     

    American Association of Nurse Anesthesiology

    Source link

  • Future of Nursing Scholars: Reflections on Forward-Thinking Nursing Doctoral Education

    Future of Nursing Scholars: Reflections on Forward-Thinking Nursing Doctoral Education

    Newswise — PHILADELPHIA (April 28, 2023) – As the distinguished Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Future of Nursing Scholars (FNS) program ends, a special section of an issue of the journal Nursing Outlook offers an in-depth review from University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing (Penn Nursing) leaders about the program’s success and its long-lasting impact on nursing scholars, faculty, and institutions.

    The FNS Program Overview

    During the course of the FNS program, nurses from 46 schools pursued their PhDs as Future of Nursing Scholars and more than 180 scholars graduated. In the article “Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Future of Nursing Scholars Program: An Overview,”(available online), the authors describe the state of the field at program launch, the program development, and operations.

    “Preliminary results suggest accelerated PhD programs featuring intensive mentoring and financial support can produce well-prepared nurse researchers ready for post-doctoral positions and leadership roles,” says Heather J. Kelley, Deputy Director of the RWJF Future of Nursing Scholars Program and the article’s lead author. “Given the critical need for more PhD-prepared nurses in the United States and the concerns about the length of time required to complete a PhD, it is essential that innovative approaches like the FNS model be integrated into nursing education.”

    Co-authors include Amanda Bastelica, Associate Director, RWJF Future of Nursing Scholars, McKenzie Boschitsch, Program Coordinator, and Julie Fairman, PhD, RN, FAAN, Endowed Chair, Nightingale Professor in Honor of Nursing Veterans and Director of the RWJF Future of Nursing Scholars, all of Penn Nursing; Maryjoan Ladden, Senior Program Officer, 2008-2019, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; Nicholas Giordano of Emory University; and Susan Hassmiller, Senior Advisor for Nursing Emeritus, Director Emeritus, RWJF Future of Nursing Scholars.

    The FNS Program Impact

    The FNS program prepared the next generation of nursing leaders, strengthened nursing education, and led transformational change in health care. In the article “The Impact of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Future of Nursing Scholars Program on Scholars, Schools and Nursing Science,” (available online), the authors describe the program’s impact on the scholars and schools that participated and the perceived impact on nursing science.

    “The FNS program provided a large-scale demonstration, across academic environments, for the success of implementing three-year PhD programs to prepare the next generation of nurse leaders,” says Fairman. “The program also provided proof-of-concept “on high-quality accelerated PhD education for nursing students well matched with mentors, and elevated the national conversation on PhD education.”

    Other coauthors include Nicholas Giordano of Emory University and Maryjoan Ladden of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

    Faculty Mentoring in the FNS Program

    Faculty mentoring was an important part of the success of the FNS program. In the article “Characteristics of Faculty Mentoring in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Future of Nursing Scholars Program,” (available online), authors describe the experience of faculty mentors involved with the program, including support activities for students, time commitment, student productivity in manuscript dissemination, and challenges and opportunities for supporting students.

    “Completing a PhD program in three years requires increased use of faculty resources including intensive faculty mentor time,” says Fairman. “The FNS program demonstrated that committed mentors, shared research interests, structured plans (use of IDPs), and identification and provision of emotional support are imperative to success.”

    Other co-authors include Gordon Lee Gillespie of the University of Cincinnati and April Hazard Vallerand of Wayne State University.

    Adapting Nursing PhD Curricula into a Three-Year Program

    The FNS program supported 45 nursing schools to create or adapt their PhD curricula to facilitate students completing the degree in three years. In the article “Three-Year Nursing PhD Curriculum Content Among Schools Participating in the Future of Nursing Scholars Program,”(available online), the authors identify and analyze common elements of the three-year PhD curricula.

    “Most frequently seen across curricula included content focused on statistics, qualitative methods, quantitative methods, additional research methods, theory, and philosophy courses. These findings can be used to inform the development and educational needs of future nurse scientists,” says Fairman. “Continued and concentrated efforts are needed to elevate trainees’ exposure to emerging priority areas in nursing science, rather than regulating them to electives or cognates while balancing the broad interdisciplinary training needs that are necessary for developing scientific inquiry.”

    Other co-authors include Nicholas Giordano of Emory University and Maryjoan Ladden, Senior Program Officer, 2008-2019, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

    The FNS Program Scholar Experience

    The FNS program used a multi-pronged approach to support nurses completing accelerated PhD programs. In the article “The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Future of Nursing Scholars Program: The Scholar Experience,”(available online), the authors describe scholars’ experiences completing PhDs, their dissertation characteristics, program leadership development sessions, and scholar perceptions of program components.

    “Scholars’ experiences with the FNS program were enthusiastically positive, evident by exit survey and interview data. Despite the shortened timeline of their plan of study, scholars completed the FNS and PhD programs feeling prepared to be successful nurse leaders and scientists,” says Kelley. “Five important contributions maximized the success of this program. Those are mentorship, cohort cohesion, opportunity to build leadership skills, funding support, and guidance.”

    Co-authors include Fairman, Amanda Bastelica, MPA, McKenzie Boschitsch, and Maxine Wicks, all of Penn Nursing; Nicholas Giordano of Emory University; Maryjoan Ladden of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; and Madison McCarthy of the TriStar Skyline Medical Center.

    FNS Focus Group Results

    In January 2022, the national program office hosted an in-person convening for scholars and mentors from all cohorts as a capstone event at the end of the nine-year FNS program. In the article “RWJF Future of Nursing Scholars Experience and Recommendations: Focus Group Results at Final Convening,” (available online), the authors share focus group insight from that meeting about why the scholars chose to participate in the program, meeting facilitators, and barriers they experienced during the program.

    “We learned that participants valued the mentorship model, networking, connecting with other scholars, regular meetings with FNS scholars and mentors, and other opportunities available to them. They also expressed that financial support was very important,” says Fairman.

    Participants recommended that more information about the PhD and the differentiation between a PhD and DNP needs to be communicated to nurses to help them to better understand the role and benefits of nurse scientists. Participants also noted the name recognition and reputation of RWJF as a factor in their decision to become a RWJF FNS.

    Co-authors include Fairman, Kelley, Kathryn H. Bowles, PhD, RN, FAAN, FACMI, Professor of Nursing and the van Ameringen Chair in Nursing Excellence, all of Penn Nursing; Robin P. Newhouse of Indiana University School of Nursing; Maureen George of Columbia University School of Nursing; and Mayumi A. Willgerodt, University of Washington School of Nursing.

    The End or a New Beginning?

    Following the 2010 National Academy of Medicine report, “The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health,” the RWJF created the FNS program. At its heart was a goal to equip a cadre of PhD-prepared nurses for long-term careers advancing science and discovery, strengthening nursing education, and leading transformational change in health care.

    The RWJF committed $20 million to the program and developed a philanthropic collaborative to bring an additional $5 million in funding to the program. Through a competitive selection process, Penn Nursing was chosen as the National Program Office. Development of the FNS program emanated from the program office and incorporated three key pillars: science, innovation, and policy. The program provided financial support, mentoring, and leadership development to nurses who committed to earning their PhDs in three years.

    While the FNS program has come to an end, its impact on creating options for how nurse scientists are prepared is sure to be long-lasting. “Perhaps the most important lesson learned from the FNS program is that innovation and experimentation in both the structure and process of doctoral education is not only possible, but essential,” says Antonia M. Villarruel, PhD, RN, FAAN, Professor and the Margaret Bond Simon Dean of Nursing at Penn Nursing. Her article (available online), “The End? or a New Beginning? Perspectives on Lessons Learned from the Future of Nursing Scholars Program and the Preparation of PhD Nurse Scholars,” which concludes the journal’s special section.

    Villarruel encourages continued financial support of students in nursing PhD programs, and a better understanding of how investment in nursing doctoral education can support the priorities of foundations, health care institutions, and schools. “The creativity and support of the RWJF National program office, program leadership at Penn, and the efforts of so many Schools of Nursing and Foundations at the institutional level in support of the next generation of nurse scientists bodes well for the future and health of those whom we serve,” she adds.

    University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing

    Source link

  • Digital Health Initiative Research Could Lead to More Reliable Health Apps

    Digital Health Initiative Research Could Lead to More Reliable Health Apps

    BYLINE: Doug M Dollemore

    Newswise — Seven University of Utah Health projects have received seed grants that could promote the development and use of more scientifically based digital health applications in daily health care.  

    The grants, supported by the Digital Health Initiative (DHI), will focus on projects  designed to produce safer and more effective digital tools than are currently available, according to Guilherme Del Fiol, M.D., Ph.D., co-director of DHI and a professor in the Department of Biomedical Informatics at U of U Health.

    “There’s been a surge in the use of digital health applications in the past few years, both by patients and their doctors,” Del Fiol says. “But how many of these apps actually work as intended? Most are promoted with little or no rigorous scientific evidence.”

    In fact, a 2019 analysis of studies conducted by the 25 top-funded American producers of digital health tools, including wearable biosensors and mobile health apps, found that most of these products did not have a substantial impact on health outcomes, cost, or access to care. Another study of mental health apps concluded that only 14% of the 1,400 apps evaluated were based on real-world experiences, and none mentioned a certification or accreditation process.

    “We see these seed grants as a tremendous opportunity to alter that trajectory,” Del Fiol says. “They represent a starting point for taking innovative, reliable, and scientifically tested digital health applications from bench to bedside.”

    The seed grant projects will receive up to $50,000 for one year. The researchers will develop, test, and evaluate digital applications that fall within one of the four main areas of interest within the DHI: 

    • Mobile apps and games for health
    • Virtual reality and sensors
    • Clinical decision support tools
    • Integration with electronic health records (EHR)

    If successful, the projects will progress to clinical trials designed to assess their usefulness in a larger context, says Victoria Tiase, Ph.D., R.N.,  director of strategic development at DHI.

    “Clinicians treating patients at the bedside need better efficiency today,” Tiase says. “So, we need to get more practical and effective digital tools in the pipeline. We hope that these seed grants will be a jumping-off point for that effort.”

    Recipients of the seven seed grants represent 11 U of U Health disciplines, ranging from anesthesiology to nursing to population health.

    Project Titles, Summaries, & Awardees

    Health Records and Community Service Integration of the Going Home Toolkit

    Andrea Wallace, Ph.D. (Nursing)

    Roger Altizer, Ph.D. (Entertainment Arts Engineering, Population Health Sciences)

    Kensaku Kawamoto, M.D., Ph.D. (Biomedical Informatics)

    Wallace and colleagues will evaluate the effectiveness of a digital resource planner to help patients self-manage their health conditions after they leave the hospital. Called the “Going Home Toolkit”, the planner includes sections on transportation, medication, errands, meals, housework, personal care, billing, and insurance. It is also designed to help patients better communicate their needs to family, friends, and health care providers. 

    Broadening the Impact of Symptom Care at Home Through EHR Integration and Implementation Science 

    Elizabeth Sloss, Ph.D., M.B.A., R.N. (Nursing, Huntsman Cancer Institute)

    Kathi Mooney, Ph.D., R.N (Nursing)

    Justin D. Smith, Ph.D. (Population Health Sciences)

    Guilherme Del Fiol, M.D., Ph.D. (Biomedical Informatics)

    Kensaku Kawamoto, M.D., Ph.D. (Biomedical Informatics)

    Symptom Care at Home, a program that helps cancer patients reduce symptoms that occur during treatment for cancer, asks patients to report daily symptoms in a mobile application or by phone and receive automated coaching or follow-up from a nurse practitioner to manage their symptoms. With this DHI seed grant, the researchers will identify ways that Symptom Care at Home can incorporate patient-reported symptoms into their electronic health records.

    Patient Generated Health Data for Geriatrics Patients

    Jorie Butler, Ph.D. (Biomedical Informatics)

    Butler will collect patient-generated health data, using mobile devices like a Fitbit, from patients aged 65 and older with chronic pain. The participating patients will review and discuss their personal data with the research team to help them understand how these data are useful to patients in managing their own health. This research can be applied to future care of pain and other health conditions.

    Expanding the Capability of Intraprocedure Anesthesia Information Display and Pharmacology Forecasting

    Ken B. Johnson, M.D., M.S. (Anesthesiology)

    Beca Chacin (Anesthesiology Center for Patient Simulation)

    Soeren Hoehne (Anesthesiology Center for Patient Simulation)

    Cameron Jacobsen, M.S. (Anesthesiology)

    Noah Syroid, M.S. (Anesthesiology)

    Johnson and colleagues seek to combine an anesthesia forecasting system with electronic health records at U of U Health. With this system, an anesthesia provider will have visual guidance to monitor and predict the levels of sedation, analgesia (pain relief), and muscle relaxation for a patient who is undergoing general anesthesia.

    Explainable AI for Equitable Risk Stratification of Atrial Fibrillation and Stroke

    Mark Yandell, Ph.D. (Human Genetics, Bioinformatics)

    Martin Tristani Firouzi, M.D. (Pediatrics)

    Benjamin Steinberg M.D. (Cardiology)

    Using artificial intelligence, Yandell and colleagues seek to produce more accurate predictions of individual stroke risk. The computational model will account for socioeconomic disparities seldom considered in previous attempts at predicting strokes. These considerations include housing, transportation, and discrimination, and accessibility to nutritious foods and exercise. These refined predictions will enable doctors to offer patients more personalized stroke prevention advice.  

    Remote sensing of autonomic function and mobility coupling using wearables to monitor recovery after mild traumatic brain injury.

    Peter Fino, Ph.D. (Health and Kinesiology)

    Melissa Cortez, D.O. (Neurology)

    Leland Dibble, Ph.D., P.T. (Physical Therapy & Athletic Training) 

    Fino and his colleagues seek to develop a system to assess individuals who have persistent symptoms of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), such as concussions. The researchers will monitor activity, heart rate, and other key indicators of mTBI using wearable at-home devices. 

    By combining data streams from these devices worn at home, the researchers believe they can identify individuals with persistent mTBI symptoms earlier and expedite rehabilitation when they show signs of atypical recovery.

    Spanish Language Translation and Preliminary Feasibility of NeuroFlex: A Digital Cognitive Intervention for Late Life Depression

    Sarah Morimoto, Psy.D. (Population Health Sciences)

    Morimoto will translate and test a video game designed to relieve depression among older Spanish-speaking volunteers. The game, called Neurogrow, allows players to tend a virtual garden, performing tasks including watering, fertilizing, and eliminating pesky bugs.

    In previous research, the scientists found that Neurogrow helped relieve depression and improve cognitive function among English-speaking, non-Hispanic older men and women. The researchers hope to find similar results in Spanish-speaking volunteers. If successful, they plan to use Neurogrow more broadly in Latino/Hispanic communities.

    ###

    University of Utah Health

    Source link

  • Susan G. Komen® Welcomes Nine Leaders to Research Advisory Roles

    Susan G. Komen® Welcomes Nine Leaders to Research Advisory Roles

    Newswise — DALLAS – APRIL 27, 2023 – Susan G. Komen®, the world’s leading breast cancer organization, has appointed nine world-renowned medical and research experts to serve as advisors to the organization.  These breast cancer experts will be part of a distinguished group, known as Komen Scholars, who help guide Komen’s research and scientific programs, with a focus on advancing discoveries to improve breast cancer outcomes for everyone.

    The incoming class of nine Scholars joins an advisory group of nearly 50 world-class leaders in breast cancer research and advocacy, representing about 30 health institutions across the nation. Their expertise spans many areas, including breast cancer biology, genomics, biomarkers, health disparities, therapeutics, clinical trials and imaging. The Komen Scholars contribute to a variety of Komen programs, including leading Komen’s scientific peer review process and act as Komen ambassadors in communities around the U.S. and the world.

    “We’re so excited to welcome these incredible individuals as Komen Scholars. Komen is fortunate to have such a tremendous team of experts guiding our work and research priorities: to advance precision medicine, conquer deadly and aggressive breast cancers and achieve health equity,” said Kimberly Sabelko, Ph.D., vice president of scientific strategy & programs at Susan G. Komen.

    The nine clinical oncologists and researchers are:

    • Carlos Arteaga, M.D., University of Texas Southwestern Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center
    • Myles Brown, M.D., Harvard Medical School/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
    • Susan Domchek, M.D., University of Pennsylvania/Perelman School of Medicine
    • David Mankoff, M.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania
    • Kathy Miller, M.D., Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center
    • Harikrishna Nakshatri, BVSc, Ph.D., Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center
    • Jeffrey Rosen, Ph.D., Baylor College of Medicine
    • Bryan Schneider, M.D., Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center
    • Antonio Wolff, M.D., FACP, FASCO, Johns Hopkins University/Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center

    “The Komen Scholars bring their expertise and experience from laboratories, clinics and as patients. They are incredible assets to the transformative work we’re doing at Komen to accelerate research at a time when there is critical need to advance personalized medicine to help everyone impacted by breast cancer live longer, healthier lives,” said Jennifer A. Pietenpol, Ph.D., chief scientific advisor at Susan G. Komen, Chief Scientific and Strategy Officer and Executive Vice President for Research at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Ingram Professor of Cancer Research and Professor of Biochemistry at the Vanderbilt School of Medicine. 

    Komen also expressed its appreciation for the scientific advisors whose terms have come to an end:  

    • Nikhil Wagle, M.D. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
    • Anne Meyn, M.Ed., Advocates in Science, Houston, TX

    These leaders are the foremost experts in breast cancer and will make a lasting impact to advance progress against deadly and aggressive breast cancers and achieve health equity to benefit everyone affected by this disease,” said Ann Partridge, M.D., MPH, chief scientific advisor for Susan G. Komen and the Eric P. Winer, M.D., Chair in Breast Cancer Research, Vice Chair of the Department of Medical Oncology, Director of the Adult Survivorship Program and Director of the Program for Young Women with Breast Cancer at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. “We’re grateful for the service of our departing Komen Scholars and appreciate the commitment they, our current, and new Komen Scholars have to ending breast cancer forever.”

    For more information about Komen’s research and advocacy scholars go to https://www.komen.org/breast-cancer-research/meet-our-scholars/.

    About Susan G. Komen® 

    Susan G. Komen® is the world’s leading nonprofit breast cancer organization, working to save lives and end breast cancer forever. Komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting this disease across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the U.S. and in countries worldwide.  We advocate for patients, drive research breakthroughs, improve access to high-quality care, offer direct patient support and empower people with trustworthy information. Founded by Nancy G. Brinker, who promised her sister, Susan G. Komen, that she would end the disease that claimed Suzy’s life, Komen remains committed to supporting those affected by breast cancer today, while tirelessly searching for tomorrow’s cures. Visit komen.org or call 1-877 GO KOMEN. Connect with us on social at www.komen.org/contact-us/follow-us/.  

     

     

    Susan G. Komen

    Source link

  • Pandemic-era Medicaid benefits expire, expert explains economic impact

    Pandemic-era Medicaid benefits expire, expert explains economic impact

    Medicaid benefits were expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic to cover low-income patients without a need for them to prove their eligibility or to reapply. At the end of March, those benefit expansions expired, and states have begun reviewing the Medicaid rolls to remove those who do not qualify, a process that could create new hardships for millions of Americans.

    The mass disenrollment also has potential to affect the U.S. economy in ways that reverberate beyond any given household’s loss of affordable access to medical care. Virginia Tech economics professor Jadrian Wooten explained what effects this change to Medicaid could bring about on both an individual and national level.

    Q: What would be the most direct effects for the U.S. of the rollout of Medicaid disenrollment?

    “The group most immediately impacted by the Medicaid disenrollment will be those who lose their coverage but still require expensive medical care. Unfortunately, some individuals may be unintentionally disenrolled from Medicaid, despite still being eligible, due to errors in the enrollment process or not receiving renewal notices.”

    Q: Is there any way that the disenrollment of those on Medicaid can have economic effects on those who are not insured through Medicaid?

    “The people who are removed may find themselves without access to affordable healthcare services, which can lead to untreated illnesses and financial strain for those who need medical care. This could also result in increased emergency room visits and hospitalizations, which are more costly and less effective than preventative care, crowd out other people who need attention as well, and drive up medical costs for everyone.”

    Q: What could be the economic reverberations beyond healthcare?

    “The loss of Medicaid coverage can have effects that extend beyond just health and wellness. For instance, if people lose their coverage and can’t get the medical care they need, they may become less productive at work or miss work because of illness. This could cause a decrease in their earnings, which in turn could affect the economy in various ways. For example, it could reduce spending in local businesses and communities, especially in areas with a high percentage of Medicaid recipients.”

    Q: How many could be affected by this process?

    “The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that up to 15 million people may be disenrolled from Medicaid, including roughly 6.8 million individuals who will likely still be eligible for coverage. Getting reenrolled in Medicaid can be a time-consuming process that may disrupt families’ and individuals’ work obligations. It’s crucial to keep in mind that more than half of Medicaid beneficiaries are children. While it is the responsibility of their parents or caretakers to enroll their children in the program, cutting off their parents (whether intentional or not) can significantly affect these children as well.”

    About Wooten
    Jadrian Wooten is collegiate associate professor at Virginia Tech within the Department of Economics. He is the author of the book Parks and Recreation and Economics and of the newsletter Monday Morning Economists. Read more about him here.

    Medicaid benefits were expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic to cover low-income patients without a need for them to prove their eligibility or to reapply. At the end of March, those benefit expansions expired, and states have begun reviewing the Medicaid rolls to remove those who do not qualify, a process that could create new hardships for millions of Americans.

    The mass disenrollment also has potential to affect the U.S. economy in ways that reverberate beyond any given household’s loss of affordable access to medical care. Virginia Tech economics professor Jadrian Wooten explained what effects this change to Medicaid could bring about on both an individual and national level.

    Q: What would be the most direct effects for the U.S. of the rollout of Medicaid disenrollment?

    “The group most immediately impacted by the Medicaid disenrollment will be those who lose their coverage but still require expensive medical care. Unfortunately, some individuals may be unintentionally disenrolled from Medicaid, despite still being eligible, due to errors in the enrollment process or not receiving renewal notices.”

    Q: Is there any way that the disenrollment of those on Medicaid can have economic effects on those who are not insured through Medicaid?

    “The people who are removed may find themselves without access to affordable healthcare services, which can lead to untreated illnesses and financial strain for those who need medical care. This could also result in increased emergency room visits and hospitalizations, which are more costly and less effective than preventative care, crowd out other people who need attention as well, and drive up medical costs for everyone.”

    Q: What could be the economic reverberations beyond healthcare?

    “The loss of Medicaid coverage can have effects that extend beyond just health and wellness. For instance, if people lose their coverage and can’t get the medical care they need, they may become less productive at work or miss work because of illness. This could cause a decrease in their earnings, which in turn could affect the economy in various ways. For example, it could reduce spending in local businesses and communities, especially in areas with a high percentage of Medicaid recipients.”

    Q: How many could be affected by this process?

    “The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that up to 15 million people may be disenrolled from Medicaid, including roughly 6.8 million individuals who will likely still be eligible for coverage. Getting reenrolled in Medicaid can be a time-consuming process that may disrupt families’ and individuals’ work obligations. It’s crucial to keep in mind that more than half of Medicaid beneficiaries are children. While it is the responsibility of their parents or caretakers to enroll their children in the program, cutting off their parents (whether intentional or not) can significantly affect these children as well.”

    About Wooten
    Jadrian Wooten is collegiate associate professor at Virginia Tech within the Department of Economics. He is the author of the book Parks and Recreation and Economics and of the newsletter Monday Morning Economists. Read more about him here.

    Virginia Tech

    Source link

  • Biogen wins accelerated FDA approval for treatment for rare form of ALS

    Biogen wins accelerated FDA approval for treatment for rare form of ALS

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said Tuesday it has granted accelerated approval to Biogen Inc.’s torferson, a treatment for a rare form of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS.

    The accelerated program is used to approve drugs for serious conditions that have an unmet medical need, where a drug is shown to have an effect on an endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict a clinical benefit to patients.

    In…

    Source link

  • Columbia University Launches Center for Precision Psychiatry & Mental Health with $75 Million Grant from the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF)

    Columbia University Launches Center for Precision Psychiatry & Mental Health with $75 Million Grant from the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF)

    Newswise — NEW YORK, April 24, 2023—Columbia University today announced the establishment of the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) Center for Precision Psychiatry & Mental Health at Columbia University. The center will catalyze the scientific innovation and clinical implementation of precision medicine to advance the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of mental illness. The center is being established with a $75 million grant from the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF), an international philanthropic organization, as part of SNF’s Global Health Initiative (GHI). 

    The SNF Center is a joint effort of the Department of Psychiatry at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons and Columbia’s Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute. It will be embedded within Columbia University’s unique ecosystem of research and clinical services and will draw upon expertise from the Columbia-affiliated New York Genome Center and the New York State Office of Mental Health.

    The increasing sophistication of precision medicine is allowing scientists and health care providers to integrate each person’s unique genomic, physiologic, and health profiles to create optimized prevention and treatment strategies. Columbia University has been at the forefront of recent efforts to elucidate the genetic and biological changes that cause a multitude of severe mental illnesses. The SNF Center for Precision Psychiatry & Mental Health will build upon and expand this knowledge by accumulating massive datasets of genomic sequences and longitudinal medical records.  At the same time, by harnessing interdisciplinary expertise from biologists to clinicians, the center will enable the rapid advent, from bench to bedside, of new therapeutic and prevention approaches based upon defined etiologies shared by distinct subgroups of patients.

    “The insights provided by genomics and precision medicine are proving of tremendous value in improving people’s health and lives,” said Columbia University President Lee C. Bollinger. “Through this new center, our researchers will meet an urgent human need by harnessing precision medicine to promote mental health for all. We are enormously grateful to the Stavros Niarchos Foundation for joining with Columbia in meeting this profound scientific and humanitarian challenge.”

    “The significant progress we have made in caring for our physical health in recent decades is apparent, but just as clear is the fact that we have left behind our mental health,” said SNF Co-President Andreas Dracopoulos. “All of us at SNF are proud to support the doctors, scientists, and mental health professionals at Columbia in bringing together deep expertise with an equally deep sense of humanity to address one of the most critical issues of our time.”

    The collaboration between Columbia and SNF arose from a joint vision for helping to reduce the individual and societal toll of mental illness and to combat social inequality, stigma, and discrimination in mental health care. The ecosystem of knowledge and practice at Columbia University brings together research and clinical services and connects the public and private sectors. By driving innovation in mental health research and sharing advances as widely as possible, Columbia and SNF will work to help ensure that improved treatments are equally available to everyone. 

    “Many existing treatments in psychiatry do not get at root causes,” said Katrina Armstrong, MD, Chief Executive Officer of Columbia University Irving Medical Center and Dean of the Faculties of Health Sciences at the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons. “We welcome this opportunity to develop new approaches that focus on disease mechanisms and target treatment based on an individual’s unique genetic makeup and biology for the ultimate benefit of lifting up care for the community at large.”

    Among the major projects of the SNF Center is the Genomic Medicine for Mental Health Advancement (GeMMA) initiative, being conducted in close collaboration with the New York Genome Center (NYGC). Tom Maniatis, PhD, Evnin Family Scientific Director and CEO of the NYGC and Isidore Edelman Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics at Columbia, said, “The GeMMA initiative will not only provide essential information for individual patients, it will also build upon and expand pioneering work at Columbia University central to establishing ‘causal’ relationships between genetic variation and brain function, which is a critical step in the development of new approaches to diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of mental illness.”

    The New York State Office of Mental Health (OMH) is a major partner of the SNF Center with a renowned reputation as one of the largest and most innovative learning public mental healthcare systems in the nation. OMH Commissioner Ann Sullivan, MD said, “The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Center for Precision Psychiatry & Mental Health ushers in an entirely new era of mental health care through the unprecedented potential for integration of precision psychiatry into standard clinical practice. OMH is proud to partner with Columbia University on this transformative mission, and we are deeply grateful to SNF for their remarkable commitment to improving mental health worldwide.”

    The center will be co-directed by Sander Markx, MD, assistant professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia’s Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons (VP&S) and director of the Center for Precision Neuropsychiatry at the New York State Psychiatric Institute; Steven A. Kushner, MD, PhD, professor of psychiatry at VP&S and a principal investigator at the New York State Psychiatric Institute; and Joseph Gogos, MD, PhD, professor of physiology & cellular biophysics, neuroscience, and psychiatry at VP&S and a principal investigator at Columbia’s Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute, who together conveyed their collective vision for the center: “With this extraordinary support from SNF, we are poised to build on the accelerating progress in psychiatric genomics, neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and stem cell biology to revolutionize the treatment of mental illness. Through this new understanding, we are fundamentally committed to helping combat stigma and discrimination against people living with mental illness and realizing improved mental health care for all.”

     

    About the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF)

    The Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) is one of the world’s leading private, international philanthropic organizations, making grants to nonprofit organizations in the areas of arts and culture, education, health and sports, and social welfare. SNF funds organizations and projects worldwide that aim to achieve a broad, lasting, and positive impact for society at large, and exhibit strong leadership and sound management. The Foundation also supports projects that facilitate the formation of public-private partnerships as an effective means for serving the public welfare. 

    Since 1996, the Foundation has committed over $3.5 billion through more than 5,200 grants to nonprofit organizations in over 130 countries around the world. The ongoing $750 million-plus Global Health Initiative (GHI) is SNF’s largest-ever grant initiative. It includes the design, construction and outfitting of three new hospitals in Greece, procurement of critical equipment such as air ambulances, training programs for health care providers, efforts to expand access to quality mental health care such as the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Initiative in Greece, and collaborations with institutions like The Rockefeller University, the Child Mind Institute, and the National Children’s Alliance in the United States; Sant Joan de Déu Barcelona Children’s Hospital; King Hussein Cancer Foundation and Center in Jordan; and Yorkshire Cancer Research in the United Kingdom.

    See more at snf.org.

     

    About Columbia University

    Among the world’s leading research universities, Columbia University in the City of New York continually seeks to advance the frontiers of scholarship and foster a campus community deeply engaged in understanding and confronting the complex issues of our time through teaching, research, patient care and public service. The Department of Psychiatry at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons is among the top-ranked psychiatry departments in the nation and has made major contributions to the understanding and treatment of psychiatric disorders. For almost a century, the department has collaborated with the New York State Office of Mental Health’s Psychiatric Institute, an international leader in understanding mental health and mental illness. Columbia is also home to the Zuckerman Institute, a renowned neuroscience research center that pioneers urgently needed insights into mind, brain and behavior that benefit health and society.

    ####

    Columbia University Irving Medical Center

    Source link

  • 8 value stocks that look like bargains for long-term investors

    8 value stocks that look like bargains for long-term investors

    When is it a good time to buy stocks? Some investors would say the current negativity dominating the financial media means you are better off sitting on the sidelines. Others would say it is always a good time to buy stocks, provided you can get them for good prices.

    Count John Buckingham, editor of the Prudent Speculator, in the latter camp. He is a value investor with decades of experience. During an interview, he emphasized the importance of remaining disciplined through all market conditions. While he favors the value…

    Source link

  • Achieving Prevention and Health, Rather Than More Healthcare

    Achieving Prevention and Health, Rather Than More Healthcare

    Newswise — If more people have access to health insurance, we have to be sure the death rates of those with certain chronic conditions are decreasing.

    This is one of the statements Gregory Peck, an acute care surgeon and associate professor at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, will be researching on behalf of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) at the National Institutes of Health.

    Funded by NIH grants totaling more than $1 million through a recent two-year award from the New Jersey Alliance for Clinical and Translational Science (NJ ACTS), a Rutgers hub of the National Center for Advancing Translation Science, and now a four-year award from the NIDDK, Peck is on average one of just two critical care surgeons funded nationally annually creating new models of health for NIH consideration.

    Peck recently published two studies investigating death rates for gallstone disease, a disease of the abdomen that causes right-sided belly pain after eating, which share risk factors with other deadly diseases. His study, published in Gastro Hep Advances, found that between 2009 and 2018 the number of deaths of people in New Jersey with diagnosed gallstone disease (1,580) remained steady and did not improve, and that deaths in Latinos ages 65 and older potentially increased.

    His study in the Journal of Surgical Research found that after Medicaid expansion in 2014 as compared to before, the amount of emergency surgery to remove the gallbladders for gallstone disease decreased in the state overall, but increased in people with Medicaid. While fatality from gallbladder removal surgery decreased for those 65 or older, there was increased death from surgery in the younger population and a trend of more death in the population with Medicaid. Further, the relatively decreased amount of gallbladder removal surgery occurring in ambulatory outpatient care centers did not necessarily help this.

    Peck discusses the implications of the findings on a new shift in healthcare to prevention model.

    Why did you focus on gallstone disease?

    As a metabolic disease, gallstone disease is also linked to heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity and a sedentary lifestyle. In fact, heart disease, which is the No. 1 killer in America, and gallstone disease, which is the No. 1 digestive disease requiring surgery in America, share the risk factors of high levels of bad cholesterol type and obesity.

    How do these studies inform public policy?

    The amount of people dying with gallstone disease – most of whom require surgery – over the past decade has not gotten better. That’s 160 people a year who still are dying from a preventable death such as gallstone disease. Making progress is what this type of epidemiologic study focuses on, and concerningly, we might not have made good progress.

    If Medicaid expansion didn’t positively affect the death rate of people with gallstone disease and we see it increase specifically in older Latino populations, we need to be asking if we are helping people of color and those who live in communities with lower socioeconomic status improve health or treating them sooner to prevent emergency surgery and especially decreasing death from emergency surgery. Insurance expansion is certainly needed, but we have to ensure the action specific pieces of policy impact the population requiring surgery in a patient-centered way.

    The real goal is preventing the disease from even occurring. When we pass public health policy, we need to advocate for preventive care that reaches people through their community. Right now, the findings show that we might just be providing people with insurance cards who find themselves still needing to use the emergency department. Instead, that insurance should help them visit their primary care doctor, who can help them make changes like decreasing their bad cholesterol levels, which contribute to gallstone disease, and help them access care in ambulatory surgery centers sooner.

    We need to cultivate preventive healthcare rather than ballooning the investment in emergency healthcare, which does not solve current inequities.

    What other steps to improve access to care should be taken?

    We propose a novel population health approach that shifts from the reactive treatments of emergency disease to proactive prevention. One place to start is increasing access to appropriate outpatient elective healthcare for underrepresented groups with barriers to preventive care, such as by increasing health insurance that incentivizes the behaviors toward improved health. A first step for my research group is to focus on diseases that currently require as much emergency as elective care, such as gallstone disease, and understand this by understanding who presents to the hospital, as to dial this back into the community level, to decrease hospital care.

    In addition, in primary care, laboratory, radiology or ambulatory care settings we need to improve communication with people with low English proficiency – especially how well prevention is explained in a patient’s primary language. Language barriers might also prevent them from understanding the importance of cholesterol or blood pressure control over the one, two and three decades of life, or how they find access to diagnostic tests or treatment needed earlier.

    How is Rutgers working to increase primary care knowledge in underserved communities?

    Shawna Hudson, the co-director of community engagement for NJ ACTS, and my research mentor, is researching how representatives rooted in the community can help healthcare providers and researchers better understand how we can use community engagement to involve people in a communities’ preventive care as to decrease risk factors for chronic disease before they need hospital-based care and, more importantly, emergency surgery.

    One initiative is the Community Engagement Virtual Salons, which help researchers and health care providers at NJ ACTS engage with patients and community members about how biomedical and clinical research leads to action through understanding disease and then enacting policy. In these sessions, the public serves as experts to provide feedback from a community perspective. This allows the medical profession to build relationships with community partners and increase the culturally sensitive participation of hard-to-reach populations.

    Rutgers University-New Brunswick

    Source link

  • New APS Leaders Take Office at Inaugural American Physiology Summit

    New APS Leaders Take Office at Inaugural American Physiology Summit

    Newswise — Long Beach, Calif. (April 23, 2023)—The American Physiological Society (APS) is pleased to announce its new member leaders for 2023–24: President Willis K. “Rick” Samson, PhD, DSc, FAPS; President-elect Timothy Musch, PhD, FAPS, FACSM; and Councilors Michael Caplan, MD, PhD, FAPS; Karla Haack, PhD; and Gina Yosten, PhD. The new officers were elected by APS membership and took office April 23, 2023, at the American Physiology Summit, APS’ flagship annual meeting, in Long Beach, California.

    Willis K. “Rick” Samson, PhD, DSc, FAPS, is professor of pharmacology and physiology and director of biomedical science graduate programs in the School of Medicine at Saint Louis University (SLU). He earned his bachelor’s degree in chemistry from Duke University in Durham, North Carolina; his PhD from the University of Texas Health Science Center at Dallas; and his DSc from Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri. Samson is the vice chair of the SLU School of Medicine’s Pharmacology and Physiology Department. He has served on numerous study sections and editorial boards for a number of scientific organizations and journals.

    Samson served the Society on the APS Council from 2016 to 2019 and was a member of the Joint Program and Public Affairs committees as well as the Committee on Committees. He is also a former member of the Endocrinology & Metabolism Section Steering Committee. Samson is a past associate editor and editor-in-chief for the American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology and is currently deputy editor of Physiological Reviews. He has been a Fellow of the American Physiological Society (FAPS) since 2015.

    Timothy Musch, PhD, FAPS, FACSM, is a University Distinguished Professor in the Departments of Kinesiology and Anatomy & Physiology at Kansas State University. He earned his PhD in exercise physiology from the University of Wisconsin and completed postdoctoral work at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School in Dallas.

    Musch’s service to the Society includes prior roles as councilor, chair of the Animal Care & Experimentation Committee and the Committee on Committees, and as a member of the Public Affairs, Education, Fellows, Membership, Nominating, Section Advisory and Strategic Planning committees. He is on the editorial boards of the Journal of Applied Physiology and the American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology. Musch was the Guyton Educator of the Year in 2013 and received FAPS status in 2016.

    Michael Caplan, MD, PhD, FAPS, is the C.N.H. Long Professor and chair of the Department of Cellular and Molecular Physiology at the Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut. He earned his MD and PhD degrees from Yale University. Caplan has been honored with awards for his work in renal physiology from numerous organizations, including APS, the American Society of Nephrologists and the National Science Foundation. Caplan is editor-in-chief of the journal Physiology and is a member of the Physiology Summit Leadership Committee. He received FAPS status in 2019.

    Karla Haack, PhD, is a medical writer at Merck and Co., where she collaboratively authors pre-approval regulatory documents. Prior to joining Merck in 2021, Haack taught anatomy and physiology and pathophysiology courses at Kennesaw State University (KSU) in Georgia. She earned her PhD in molecular biology from Georgia Institute of Technology and completed postdoctoral research at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Haack was a member of the College of Science and Mathematics Inclusion and Diversity Committee and liaison to the chief diversity officer at KSU. She is the outgoing chair of the APS Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Committee.

    Gina Yosten, PhD, is a tenured associate professor of pharmacology and physiology at SLU, where she also earned her PhD. She is a longtime APS member and has served the Society in multiple capacities, including as the chair of the Endocrinology & Metabolism Section and a member of the Section Advisory and Joint Program committees. Yosten is the editor-in-chief of the American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology and was APS’ 2023 Henry Pickering Bowditch Award Lecturer.

    Physiology is a broad area of scientific inquiry that focuses on how molecules, cells, tissues and organs function in health and disease. The American Physiological Society connects a global, multidisciplinary community of more than 10,000 biomedical scientists and educators as part of its mission to advance scientific discovery, understand life and improve health. The Society drives collaboration and spotlights scientific discoveries through its 16 scholarly journals and programming that support researchers and educators in their work.

     

    American Physiological Society (APS)

    Source link

  • Ways to reduce nurse fatigue and errors during night shifts

    Ways to reduce nurse fatigue and errors during night shifts

    Newswise — Nurses exposed to 40 minutes of bright light before their night shifts feel less fatigued and make fewer errors at work, according to a study led by McGill University. The nurses also slept better after their shifts.

    “Healthcare workers are experiencing high levels of fatigue due to staffing shortages, difficult schedules, and heavy workloads. Further, the cost of medical errors has been estimated at tens of billions of dollars per year in North America,” says Jay Olson, the senior author of the recent study in Sleep Health, who completed his PhD at McGill University and is now a Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Toronto. “Our study shows that feasible changes, such as getting light exposure before the night shift, may help reduce fatigue and its effects on performance at work, something which could benefit both the nurses and their patients.”

    Light exposure leads to a significant reduction in errors

    Building on a previous study, the researchers recruited close to 60 nurses at the McGill University Health Centre. The nurses worked schedules that rotated between day and night shifts within the same week.

    During an initial 10-day observation period, nurses in the experimental group made a total of 21 errors, ranging from giving the wrong medication dose to accidental needle pricks. However, when given 40 minutes of bright light exposure from a portable light box before their night shifts, the nurses made only 7 errors — a reduction of 67%. This confirmed the results of a previous feasibility study where the researchers saw a similar 62% reduction in the number of errors at work. In contrast, nurses in the control group who changed their diet to improve their alertness showed only a 5% reduction in errors.

    The researchers also found that nurses who followed the evening light intervention reported larger improvements in fatigue compared to those in the control group. In addition, the nurses who reported higher levels of fatigue made more errors at work.

    Small changes could make a big difference to many shift workers

    “Interventions like the one we studied are relevant to a large population of workers, since between a quarter and a third of the world’s employees do some form of shift work,” adds Mariève Cyr, the first author on the paper, a fourth-year medical student at McGill University. “Although we focused on nurses working rotating schedules, our results may apply to other types of shift workers as well.”

    The researchers are conducting workshops on practical fatigue management at hospitals and other workplaces and have launched a website that shift workers can use to adapt the interventions to their own schedules.

    The study

    “An evening light intervention reduces fatigue and errors during night shifts: A randomized controlled trial” by Mariève Cyr et al was published in Sleep Health.

    McGill University

    Source link