Home  About us  Contact
 

Physician Order (physician + order)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences100%

Terms modified by Physician Order

  • physician order entry
    		•

    Selected Abstracts

    Use of the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment Program in Oregon Nursing Facilities: Beyond Resuscitation Status

    JOURNAL OF AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, Issue 9 2004
    Susan E. Hickman PhD
    Objectives: Program was designed to communicate resident/surrogate treatment preferences in the form of medical orders. To assess statewide nursing facility use of the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) and to identify the patterns of orders documented on residents' POLST forms. Design: Telephone survey; on-site POLST form review. Setting: Oregon nursing facilities. Participants: One hundred forty-six nursing facilities in the telephone survey; 356 nursing facility residents aged 65 and older at seven nursing facilities in the POLST form review. Measurements: A telephone survey; onsite POLST form reviews. Results: In the telephone survey, 71% of facilities reported using the POLST program for at least half of their residents. In the POLST form review, do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders were present on 88% of POLST forms. On forms indicating DNR, 77% reflected preferences for more than the lowest level of treatment in at least one other category. On POLST forms indicating orders to resuscitate, 47% reflected preferences for less than the highest level of treatment in at least one other category. The oldest old (,85, n=167) were more likely than the young old (65,74, n=48) to have orders to limit resuscitation, medical treatment, and artificial nutrition and hydration. Conclusion: The POLST program is widely used in Oregon nursing facilities. A majority of individuals with DNR orders requested some other form of life-extending treatment, and advanced age was associated with orders to limit treatments. [source]

    Providers' Beliefs, Attitudes, and Behaviors before Implementing a Computerized Pneumococcal Vaccination Reminder

    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 12 2006
    Judith W. Dexheimer MS
    Abstract Background The emergency department (ED) has been recommended as a suitable setting for offering pneumococcal vaccination; however, implementations of ED vaccination programs remain scarce. Objectives To understand beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of ED providers before implementing a computerized reminder system. Methods An anonymous, five-point Likert-scale, 46-item survey was administered to emergency physicians and nurses at an academic medical center. The survey included aspects of ordering patterns, implementation strategies, barriers, and factors considered important for an ED-based vaccination initiative as well as aspects of implementing a computerized vaccine-reminder system. Results Among 160 eligible ED providers, the survey was returned by 64 of 67 physicians (96%), and all 93 nurses (100%). The vaccine was considered to be cost effective by 71% of physicians, but only 2% recommended it to their patients. Although 98% of physicians accessed the computerized problem list before examining the patient, only 28% reviewed the patient's health-maintenance section. Physicians and nurses preferred a computerized vaccination-reminder system in 93% and 82%, respectively. Physicians' preferred implementation approach included a nurse standing order, combined with physician notification; nurses, however, favored a physician order. Factors for improving vaccination rates included improved computerized documentation, whereas increasing the number of ED staff was less important. Relevant implementation barriers for physicians were not remembering to offer vaccination, time constraints, and insufficient time to counsel patients. The ED was believed to be an appropriate setting in which to offer vaccination. Conclusions Emergency department staff had favorable attitudes toward an ED-based pneumococcal vaccination program; however, considerable barriers inherent to the ED setting may challenge such a program. Applying information technology may overcome some barriers and facilitate an ED-based vaccination initiative. [source]

    Effect of Establishing Guidelines on Appropriate Urinary Catheter Placement

    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 3 2010
    Mohamad G. Fakih MD
    Abstract Objectives:, Avoiding placement of unnecessary urinary catheters (UCs) in the emergency department (ED) affects UC utilization during hospitalization. The authors sought to evaluate the effect of establishing institutional guidelines for appropriate UC placement coupled with emergency physician (EP) education on UC utilization. Methods:, Urinary catheter utilization was measured before and after the establishment of guidelines and EP education. Data collected included the presence of a UC on ED arrival, placement of a UC in the ED, documentation of a physician order for UC placement, reasons for placement, and compliance with the guidelines. Chi-square analyses were used to study the association between pre- and postintervention time periods and catheter use. Results:, A total of 377 (15%) patients had UCs; only 151 (47%) UCs initially placed in the ED had a physician order documented. UC placement was appropriately indicated in 75.5% of patients with a documented physician order, but in only 52% of cases without a documented physician order (p < 0.001). The physician intervention was associated with an overall reduction in UC utilization from 16.4% to 13% (p = 0.018). Physicians ordered 40% fewer UCs postintervention compared to preintervention. Preintervention, a physician order for UC placement was found indicated in 72.6% patients, compared to 82.2% patients with UC placed postintervention (p = 0.21). Conclusions:, Establishing guidelines for UC placement and physician education in the ED were associated with a marked reduction in utilization. However, addressing appropriate UC utilization may require evaluating other factors such as nursing influence on utilization. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:337,340 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine [source]

    Oral versus Intravenous Opioid Dosing for the Initial Treatment of Acute Musculoskeletal Pain in the Emergency Department

    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 12 2008
    James R. Miner MD
    Abstract Objectives:, The objective was to compare the time to medication administration, the side effects, and the analgesic effect at sequential time points after medication administration of an oral treatment strategy using oxycodone solution with an intravenous (IV) treatment strategy using morphine sulfate for the initial treatment of musculoskeletal pain in emergency department (ED) patients. Methods:, This was a prospective randomized clinical trial of patients >6 years old who were going to receive IV morphine sulfate for the treatment of musculoskeletal pain but did not yet have an IV. Consenting patients were randomized to have the treating physician order either 0.1 mg/kg morphine sulfate IV or 0.125 mg/kg oxycodone orally in a 5 mg/5 mL suspension as their initial treatment for pain. The time from the placement of the order to the administration of the medication was recorded. Pain was measured using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) and recorded at 0, 10, 20, 30 and 40 minutes after drug administration. Results:, A total of 405 eligible patients were identified during the study period; 328 (81.0%) patients consented to be in the study. A total of 158 patients were randomized to the IV morphine sulfate treatment group, and 162 were randomized to the oral oxycodone treatment group. Of the patients who were randomized to IV therapy, 34 were withdrawn from the study prior to drug administration; leaving 125 patients in the IV group for analysis. Of the patients who randomized to oral therapy, 22 were withdrawn from the study prior to drug administration, leaving 140 patients for analysis. No serious adverse events were detected. There was a 12-minute difference between the median time of the order and the administration of oral oxycodone (8.5 minutes) and IV morphine (20.5 minutes). The mean percent change in VAS score was larger for patients in the IV therapy group than those in the oral therapy group at 10 and 20 minutes. At 30 and 40 minutes, the authors could no longer detect a difference. The satisfaction scale score was higher after treatment for the morphine group (median = 4; interquartile range [IQR] = 4 to 5) than for the oxycodone group (median = 4; IQR = 2 to 5; p = 0.008). Conclusions:, The oral loading strategy was associated with delayed onset of analgesia and decreased patient satisfaction, but a shorter time to administration. The oral loading strategy using an oxycodone solution provided similar pain relief to the IV strategy using morphine 30 minutes after administration of the drug. Oral 0.125 mg/kg oxycodone represents a feasible alternative to 0.1 mg/kg IV morphine in the treatment of severe acute musculoskeletal pain when difficult or delayed IV placement greater than 30 minutes presents a barrier to treatment. [source]

    Risk factors for drug dependence among out-patients on opioid therapy in a large US health-care system

    ADDICTION, Issue 10 2010
    Joseph A. Boscarino
    ABSTRACT Aims Our study sought to assess the prevalence of and risk factors for opioid drug dependence among out-patients on long-term opioid therapy in a large health-care system. Methods Using electronic health records, we identified out-patients receiving 4+ physician orders for opioid therapy in the past 12 months for non-cancer pain within a large US health-care system. We completed diagnostic interviews with 705 of these patients to identify opioid use disorders and assess risk factors. Results Preliminary analyses suggested that current opioid dependence might be as high as 26% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 22.0,29.9] among the patients studied. Logistic regressions indicated that current dependence was associated with variables often in the medical record, including age <65 [odds ratio (OR) = 2.33, P = 0.001], opioid abuse history (OR = 3.81, P < 0.001), high dependence severity (OR = 1.85, P = 0.001), major depression (OR = 1.29, P = 0.022) and psychotropic medication use (OR = 1.73, P = 0.006). Four variables combined (age, depression, psychotropic medications and pain impairment) predicted increased risk for current dependence, compared to those without these factors (OR = 8.01, P < 0.001). Knowing that the patient also had a history of severe dependence and opioid abuse increased this risk substantially (OR = 56.36, P < 0.001). Conclusion Opioid misuse and dependence among prescription opioid patients in the United States may be higher than expected. A small number of factors, many documented in the medical record, predicted opioid dependence among the out-patients studied. These preliminary findings should be useful in future research efforts. [source]