DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.01.024
Splenectomy as a Destination: Improving Quality of Care Among Asplenic Veterans Through a Travel Clinic.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Asplenic patients are at risk for severe infections, but adherence to recommended preventive education and vaccination is poor. The goal of this study was to demonstrate that a targeted intervention can improve vaccination rates in a population of asplenic veterans.
METHODS
Surgically asplenic patients actively receiving care in our health care system were identified via a database search. Patients were contacted via mailed letters and encouraged to attend an existing travel clinic with a new process designed for asplenic patients. In the clinic, patients were educated on the risks of asplenia and proper preventive precautions, a vaccination history was taken, and patients were administered any additional indicated vaccines.
RESULTS
The database search yielded 113 patients; an additional 14 asplenic patients were identified and referred to the clinic by providers, and 2 were referred prior to planned splenectomy. Among all asplenic patients, the first-year referral rate to clinic was 38/129 (29%). During the first year of the intervention, there were increases in the rates of 3 of 4 recommended vaccinations: pneumococcal conjugate, 19% to 55% (P <.001); Haemophilus influenzae type B, 19% to 35% (P = .007); and meningococcal vaccine, 24% to 43% (P = .002). The pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination rate increased from 91% to 93% (P = .62).
CONCLUSIONS
Targeted interventions can improve guideline-based care for asplenic patients. The creation of a clinic designed for asplenic patients led to increases in 3 of 4 recommended vaccinations. This strategy may be applicable to other health care systems with similar numbers of asplenic patients.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.