Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Cost-effective Care (cost-effective + care)
Selected AbstractsDeveloping an advanced nurse practitioner service in emergency care: attitudes of nurses and doctorsJOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, Issue 3 2006Miriam Griffin MSc RGN PGCSNP Aim., This paper reports a study to determine the attitudes of nurses, doctors and general medical practitioners towards the development of an advanced nurse practitioner service within an emergency department. Background., The role of advanced nurse practitioner in emergency care has emerged in a number of countries, and has brought with it confusion about titles, role boundaries, clinical accountability and educational requirements. Initially, the role resulted from a need for healthcare professionals to provide a service to the increased numbers of patients presenting to hospital with less urgent problems. Since then, the service has evolved to one where nurse practitioners provide high-quality and cost-effective care to persons who seek help for non-urgent, urgent or emergent conditions in a variety of emergency care settings. However, little research could be identified on the attitudes of relevant nursing and medical staff towards the development of this role. Methods., A questionnaire survey was carried out, and a 29-item Likert rating scale was developed to measure attitudes. Along with some demographic variables, two open-ended questions were added to allow respondents to elaborate on what they perceived as benefits and difficulties associated with an advanced nurse practitioner service. All general practitioners, emergency nurses and emergency doctors in one health board in the Republic of Ireland were targeted, and 25 emergency nurses, 13 emergency doctors and 69 general practitioners were approached to take part. Data were collected in February 2004. Findings., An overall response rate of 74·8% was achieved. All respondents were positive towards the development of an advanced nurse practitioner service, with general practitioners being less positive. The principal differences appeared between general practitioners and hospital emergency care staff. Conclusion., There is a need for a multidisciplinary approach to the planning of advanced nurse practitioner services. To achieve multiprofessional acceptance, an accredited and standardized education programme is required, and this must address existing role boundaries. [source] The clinical nurse leader: a catalyst for improving quality and patient safetyJOURNAL OF NURSING MANAGEMENT, Issue 5 2008FAAN, JOAN M. STANLEY PhD Aim, The clinical nurse leader (CNL®) is a new nursing role introduced by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN). This paper describes its potential impact in practice. Background, Significant pressures are being placed on health care delivery systems to improve patient care outcomes and lower costs in an environment of diminishing resources. Method, A naturalistic approach is used to evaluate the impact the CNL has had on outcomes of care. Case studies describe the CNL implementation experiences at three different practice settings within the same geographic region. Results, Cost savings, including improvement on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) core measures, are realized quickly in settings where the CNL role has been integrated into the care delivery model. Conclusions, With the growing calls for improved outcomes and more cost-effective care, the CNL role provides an opportunity for nursing to lead innovation by maximizing health care quality while minimizing costs. Implications for nursing management, Nursing is in a unique position to address problems that plague the nation's health system. The CNL represents an exciting and promising opportunity for nursing to take a leadership role, in collaboration with multiple practice partners, and implement quality improvement and patient safety initiatives across all health care settings. [source] The Effect of High Nursing Surveillance on Hospital CostJOURNAL OF NURSING SCHOLARSHIP, Issue 2 2008Leah L. Shever Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the cost of one nursing treatment, surveillance, for older, hospitalized adults at risk for falling. Design: An observational study using information from data repositories at one Midwestern tertiary hospital. The inclusion criteria included patients age >60 years, admitted to the hospital between July 1, 1998 and June 31, 2002, at risk for falls or received the nursing treatment of fall prevention. Methods: Data came from clinical and administrative data repositories that included Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC). The nursing treatment of interest was surveillance and total hospital cost associated with surveillance was the dependent variable. Propensity-score analysis and generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used as methods to analyze the data. Independent variables related to patient characteristics, clinical conditions, nurse staffing, medical treatments, pharmaceutical treatments, and other nursing treatments were controlled for statistically. Findings: The total median cost per hospitalization was $9,274 for this sample. The median cost was different (p = 0.050) for patients who received high versus low surveillance. High surveillance delivery cost $191 more per hospitalization than did low surveillance delivery. Conclusion: Propensity scores were applied to determine the cost of surveillance among hospitalized adults at risk for falls in this observational study. The findings show the effect of high surveillance delivery on total hospital cost compared to low surveillance delivery and provides an example of a useful method of determining cost of nursing care rather than including it in the room rate. More studies are needed to determine the effects of nursing treatments on cost and other patient outcomes in order for nurses to provide cost-effective care. Propensity scores were a useful method for determining the effect of nursing surveillance on hospital cost in this observational study. Clinical Relevance: The results of this study along with possible clinical benefits would indicate that frequent nursing surveillance is important and might support the need for additional nursing staff to deliver frequent surveillance. [source] The value of medical interventions for lung cancer in the elderly,CANCER, Issue 11 2007Results from SEER-CMHSF Abstract BACKGROUND. Lung cancer is the leading source of cancer mortality and spending. However, the value of spending on the treatment of lung cancer has not been conclusively demonstrated. The authors evaluated the value of medical care between 1983 and 1997 for nonsmall cell lung cancer in the elderly US population. METHODS. The authors used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data to calculate life expectancy after diagnosis over the period 1983 to 1997. Direct costs for nonsmall cell lung cancer detection and treatment were determined by using Part A and Part B reimbursements from the Continuous Medicare History Sample File (CMHSF) data. The CMHSF and SEER data were linked to calculate lifetime treatment costs over the time period of interest. RESULTS. Life expectancy improved minimally, with an average increase of approximately 0.60 months. Total lifetime lung cancer spending rose by approximately $20,157 per patient in real, ie, adjusted for inflation, 2000 dollars from the early 1980s to the mid-1990s, for a cost-effectiveness ratio of $403,142 per life year (LY). The cost-effectiveness ratio was $143,614 for localized cancer, $145,861 for regional cancer, and $1,190,322 for metastatic cancer. CONCLUSIONS. The cost-effectiveness ratio for nonsmall cell lung cancer was higher than traditional thresholds used to define cost-effective care. The most favorable results were for persons diagnosed with early stage cancer. These results suggested caution when encouraging more intensive care for lung cancer patients without first considering the tradeoffs with the costs of this therapy and its potential effects on mortality and/or quality of life. Cancer 2007. © 2007 American Cancer Society. [source] | ||||||||||